On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 5:41 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:33, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: >> On tor, 2010-07-22 at 09:18 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> >>> wrote: >>> > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:04, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>> >> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >>> We need to decide what email addresses committers will use on the new >>> >>> git repository when they commit. >>> >> >>> >> Are you are aware that we already have a list of "approved" addresses >>> >> for the committers? >>> > >>> > Are you referring to the mapping list for the git mirror, or something >>> > else? >>> >>> Yes, the mapping list. >> >> The mapping list was originally composed by me on a whim based on what I >> thought people's email addresses tended to be. It wouldn't hurt to >> ponder Robert's points at this time. > > Agreed. And per the discussion at the developer meeting, even if we > don't limit what can be used, we should at least give committters a > chance to pick a different address from the one they are on that list > with today. > > > *Personally*, I'd prefer to keep using my main email address for > commits. This is what I use for all other projects (postgresql or > others) that I commit or contribute to. It's an address on a domain I > own, and fully control. It's a pretty clear indication of my > "identity" in the opensource world, whereas close to nobody would know > who m...@postgresql.org is. Plus, email to it tends to be delivered > much quicker and more reliably than the @postgresql.org one - though > that has improvied significantly lately. > > But I can also see Roberts point. If a committer doesn't have a > *stable* address, we won't be able to track this committer through > time. Say if he changes job and gets a new address, we can start using > that one for new commits, but not for old ones. And since we grant > commit status to the *person* and not the representative of a company, > using a company email address doesn't quite match up there. > > When it comes to using generic @gmail.com or whatever addresses, > that's somewhere in between. For a lot of people, those can definitely > be considered stable, because a change in employment, a move to a > different country, things like that, won't affect the email address > (which it would be if it was an ISP-specific one for example - that > might not transfer to a new country or even a new city).
As for me, I'd much prefer to be rh...@postgresql.org than robertmh...@gmail.com. While it's true that I'm unlikely to lose control of robertmh...@gmail.com, I might decide I'm no longer happy with their service, or whatever. Assuming I stay on the sysadmin team's good side, rh...@postgresql.org can always be repointed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers