Hi,

On Fri, 7 Dec 2018, Brandon Williams wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 10:08 PM Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes:
> >
> > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 1:40 PM Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Brandon Williams wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Signed-off-by: Brandon Williams <bwilliams....@gmail.com>
> > >> > ---
> > >> >  .mailmap | 1 +
> > >> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > >>
> > >> I can confirm that this is indeed the same person.
> > >
> > > What would be more of interest is why we'd be interested in this
> > > patch as there is no commit/patch sent by Brandon with this email in
> > > gits history.
> >
> > Once I "git am" the message that began this thread, there will be a
> > commit under this new ident, so that would be somewhat a moot point.
> >
> > If this were "Jonathan asked Brandon if we want to record an address
> > we can reach him in our .mailmap file and sent a patch to add one",
> > then the story is different, and I tend to agree with you that such a
> > patch is more or less pointless.  That's not the purpose of the
> > mailmap file.
> >
> 
> Turns out this is exactly the reason :) I've had a couple of people
> reach out to me asking me to do this because CCing my old email bounces
> and they've wanted my input/comments on something related to work I've
> done.  If that's not the intended purpose then please ignore this patch

Unless we come up with a better way to indicate the current address of a
Git contributor (I seem to remember that David Turner used the same
approach after leaving Twitter so that people could Cc: him with the
correct address), I suggest that we keep using .mailmap for that purpose.

Thanks,
Dscho

Reply via email to