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
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
42 matches
Mail list logo
