Christian Couder writes:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 2:20 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>>
>>> "Git Annotate"?
>>
>> "Git Praise" as opposed to blame?
>> "Git Who" as a pun on the subcommand structure which doesn't always
>> follows grammar?
>
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Christian Couder writes:
>
>> I wrote something about a potential Git Rev News news letter:
>
> I read it. Sounds promising.
Thanks!
[...]
> I obviously do not know how the actual contents would look like at
> this point, but depending
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 2:20 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> "Git Annotate"?
>
> "Git Praise" as opposed to blame?
> "Git Who" as a pun on the subcommand structure which doesn't always
> follows grammar?
Yeah these suggestions above are nice
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Thomas Ferris Nicolaisen
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Christian Couder
> wrote:
>>
>> I wrote something about a potential Git Rev News news letter:
>>
>> https://github.com/git/git.github.io/pull/15
>>
>
> I would love to have/use something like this
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Christian Couder
wrote:
>
> I wrote something about a potential Git Rev News news letter:
>
> https://github.com/git/git.github.io/pull/15
>
I would love to have/use something like this in the GitMinutes
podcast. Perhaps in addition to the very random interview fo
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, Junio C Hamano wrote:
David Lang writes:
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Christian Couder writes:
I wrote something about a potential Git Rev News news letter:
I read it. Sounds promising.
Just one suggestion on the name and half a comment.
How would
David Lang writes:
> On Sun, 15 Mar 2015, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Christian Couder writes:
>>
>>> I wrote something about a potential Git Rev News news letter:
>>
>> I read it. Sounds promising.
>>
>> Just one suggestion on the name and half a comment.
>>
>> How would "Git Review" (or "Git M
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Christian Couder writes:
I wrote something about a potential Git Rev News news letter:
I read it. Sounds promising.
Just one suggestion on the name and half a comment.
How would "Git Review" (or "Git Monthly Review", or replace your
favourite "h
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 2:20 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> "Git Annotate"?
>
"Git Praise" as opposed to blame?
"Git Who" as a pun on the subcommand structure which doesn't always
follows grammar?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord..
Christian Couder writes:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Randall S. Becker
> wrote:
>>> On March 15, 2015 6:19 PM Christian Couder wrote:
>>
>>> Just one suggestion on the name and half a comment.
>>>
>>> How would "Git Review" (or "Git Monthly Review", or replace your favourite
>>> "how-of
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Randall S. Becker
wrote:
>> On March 15, 2015 6:19 PM Christian Couder wrote:
>
>> Just one suggestion on the name and half a comment.
>>
>> How would "Git Review" (or "Git Monthly Review", or replace your favourite
>> "how-often-per-period-ly" in its name) sound
> On March 15, 2015 6:19 PM Christian Couder wrote:
> Just one suggestion on the name and half a comment.
>
> How would "Git Review" (or "Git Monthly Review", or replace your favourite
> "how-often-per-period-ly" in its name) sound? I meant it to sound similar
to
> academic journals that summari
Christian Couder writes:
> I wrote something about a potential Git Rev News news letter:
I read it. Sounds promising.
Just one suggestion on the name and half a comment.
How would "Git Review" (or "Git Monthly Review", or replace your
favourite "how-often-per-period-ly" in its name) sound? I
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:58 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
>> Seeing my name in "shortlog" was nice, but not that exciting. I
>> submitted a patch, it was taken, and of course it ends up in any
>> automated lists of authors. What was much more rewarding was being
>> mentioned s
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:42 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Christian Couder writes:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>
>>> I would suspect that those who agree with you would appreciate if
>>> you or somebody volunteered to act as our CKDO (chief kudos
>>> distribution
Jeff King writes:
> Seeing my name in "shortlog" was nice, but not that exciting. I
> submitted a patch, it was taken, and of course it ends up in any
> automated lists of authors. What was much more rewarding was being
> mentioned specifically in "A note from the maintainer" as a helpful
> perso
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 03:36:46PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > I hadn't thought about it when I originally suggested this, but of
> > course "new" is not strictly meaningful in a world with branches. If you
> > contribute a bugfix on top of v2.0.0 that goes to "maint", do you get to
> > be ne
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 10:05:43PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
> > I spent many years as a "type C" contributor, and I remember how nice it
> > was to see my name mentioned occasionally as a useful person.
>
> I guess that everybody is different ;-)
>
> After throwing a
Jeff King writes:
> It is comprised of 41 non-merge commits...
>
> is fine.
Thanks; very much appreciated.
>> New contributors who made this release possible are as follows.
>> Welcome to the Git development community!
>>
>> Aleksander Boruch-Gruszecki, Aleksey Vasenev, Patrick Steinhardt,
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 02:28:03PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
> > Or something along those lines. The wording and indentation of the
> > message could probably use tweaking. And there is a bash-ism in the
> > script. :)
>
> OK, I've updated the Announce script on the 'to
Fredrik Gustafsson writes:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 09:53:22PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> I'd first suggest to employ "icase" to unify *-By and *-by. Perhaps
>> we would want a recommended list somewhere in SubmittingPatches to
>> discourage people from getting too creative?
>
> There's al
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 09:53:22PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I'd first suggest to employ "icase" to unify *-By and *-by. Perhaps
> we would want a recommended list somewhere in SubmittingPatches to
> discourage people from getting too creative?
There's already such list in SubmittingPatches,
Jeff King writes:
> I spent many years as a "type C" contributor, and I remember how nice it
> was to see my name mentioned occasionally as a useful person.
I guess that everybody is different ;-)
After throwing a small patch at ROCKbox (git.rockbox.org) back when
they were still hosted on Subv
Duy Nguyen writes:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Duy Nguyen writes:
>>
>>> ... We may want to acknowledge review efforts as well, by
>>> grepping Helped-by:, Reviewed-by:...
>>
>> Agreed. Something along the lines of
>>
>> $ git shortlog --no-merges -s -n -t H
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Duy Nguyen writes:
>
>> ... We may want to acknowledge review efforts as well, by
>> grepping Helped-by:, Reviewed-by:...
>
> Agreed. Something along the lines of
>
> $ git shortlog --no-merges -s -n -t Helped-by -t Reviewed-by v2.3.0.
On 12 March 2015 at 08:28, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> OK, I've updated the Announce script on the 'todo' branch. The
> announcement for 2.3.2 I sent out earlier as $gmane/264975 would
> have looked like this.
I think the changes are excellent, and think they add a lot of value
regardless of any oth
Jeff King writes:
> Or something along those lines. The wording and indentation of the
> message could probably use tweaking. And there is a bash-ism in the
> script. :)
OK, I've updated the Announce script on the 'todo' branch. The
announcement for 2.3.2 I sent out earlier as $gmane/264975 wou
Christian Couder writes:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>
>> I would suspect that those who agree with you would appreciate if
>> you or somebody volunteered to act as our CKDO (chief kudos
>> distribution officer). I do not think I have enough time to do that
>> well
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Christian Couder writes:
>
>> I don't want to write again about each of these points now. I am more
>> interested in discussing a good strategy to try to revert the sad
>> trend of Git developers being promoted less and less, because I thin
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:38:21AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> I can add "shortlog --no-merges -s -n v2.3.0..v2.4.0" at the end of
> >> the e-mail when the release notes is sent out. That might be a good
> >> enough balance between the usefulness of the release notes to its
> >> customers an
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:31 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 07:36:34PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> > Or if that would make the release notes too cumbersome to review, what
>> > about using systemd's method? systemd's release notes include a
>> > "contributions from" section
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 07:36:34PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Or if that would make the release notes too cumbersome to review, what
> > about using systemd's method? systemd's release notes include a
> > "contributions from" section at the very end that lists everyone with
> > a patch inclu
Duy Nguyen writes:
> ... We may want to acknowledge review efforts as well, by
> grepping Helped-by:, Reviewed-by:...
Agreed. Something along the lines of
$ git shortlog --no-merges -s -n -t Helped-by -t Reviewed-by v2.3.0..
6 4 0 Michael Haggerty
3 0 1 Jeff King
"Jason St. John" writes:
> In the Git release notes for something like "git foo
> learned a new option --bar", a simple "(Thanks|Kudos) to John Smith"
> at the end of each bullet point may be a good way to recognize
> developers in a concise manner without needing to dig through the
> output of "
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:04 AM, Jason St. John wrote:
> Or if that would make the release notes too cumbersome to review, what
> about using systemd's method? systemd's release notes include a
> "contributions from" section at the very end that lists everyone with
> a patch included in the releas
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Christian Couder writes:
>
>> I don't want to write again about each of these points now. I am more
>> interested in discussing a good strategy to try to revert the sad
>> trend of Git developers being promoted less and less, because I thin
Christian Couder writes:
> I don't want to write again about each of these points now. I am more
> interested in discussing a good strategy to try to revert the sad
> trend of Git developers being promoted less and less, because I think
> that it is really very important.
I would suspect that th
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Michael J Gruber
wrote:
> Christian Couder venit, vidit, dixit 07.03.2015 08:18:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:41 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>>> At some point of time I think it may be worth reevaluating the toxic
>>> atmosphere against freelancers doing G
Michael J Gruber writes:
> I guess we have at least 3 kinds of people here:
>
> A) Paid to do Git development, at least as part of their job.
> B) Freelancers who don't get paid directly for "doing git" but hope to
> profit from their git efforts directly or indirectly.
> C) Doing it in their fre
From: "David Kastrup"
Michael J Gruber writes:
Christian Couder venit, vidit, dixit 07.03.2015 08:18:
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:41 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
At some point of time I think it may be worth reevaluating the
toxic
atmosphere against freelancers doing Git development.
My
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Michael J Gruber
wrote:
>
> Since we're talking business: git-scm.com still looks a bit like a
> ProGit/Github promotion site. I don't have anything against either, and
> git-scm.com provides a lot of the information that users are looking
> for, and that are hard t
Michael J Gruber writes:
> Christian Couder venit, vidit, dixit 07.03.2015 08:18:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:41 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>>> At some point of time I think it may be worth reevaluating the toxic
>>> atmosphere against freelancers doing Git development.
>>
>> My op
Christian Couder venit, vidit, dixit 07.03.2015 08:18:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:41 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> At some point of time I think it may be worth reevaluating the toxic
>> atmosphere against freelancers doing Git development.
>
> My opinion on this is that the Git communi
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:41 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> At some point of time I think it may be worth reevaluating the toxic
> atmosphere against freelancers doing Git development.
My opinion on this is that the Git community has not been good
especially lately at promoting its own developer
44 matches
Mail list logo
