On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 11:38:41AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sun, Apr 5, 2026 at 10:51 AM Andres Freund <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2026-04-05 16:09:57 +0200, Álvaro Herrera wrote: > > > On 2026-Apr-05, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > I just updated the wiki to handle this case because obviously > > > > Co-authored-by is listing more than just committers: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Commit_Message_Guidance#Tags%3A_%22%3A%22 > > > > Used to indicate the patch authors. "Co-authored-by:" should list > > > > individuals who modified the patch but should not be listed as > > > > authors in the release notes. > > > > I think that is a completely unwarranted change for which there is zero > > concensus. > > +1. This whole discussion is crazy to me. Every Author and Co-Author > should be listed in the release notes. If there is no author or > co-author named in the commit message, then the committer should be > listed as the sole author; otherwise, the exact list of authors and > co-authors that the committer chose to include in the commit message > should be credited. This wiki update should never have happened, and > should be reverted immediately. I don't even understand why we're > talking about this. You've invented a distinction between Author and > Co-authored-by that not a single committer seems to have ever > intended. It's just a way to indicate that some people did more work > than others, not that the co-authors do not have an authorship > interest. If they weren't supposed to be listed as authors, they would > have been listed as Reviewed-by or not at all.
Uh, the original wiki text is from a discussion on [email protected] with subject "determining the primary author of a commit" that happened around November 2024 to March 2025. Unfortunatly there is no public archive of that discussion. -- Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
