On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 20:04, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On Sunday, July 03, 2011 06:46:15 PM Tom Lane wrote: >> A look at the git-notes man page says that you can only have one note >> per commit, but you can edit that note, and git does track the revision >> history of each note. >> >> I think that we should adopt "git notes" as a better solution than >> making dummy whitespace changes when we want to put a commit-message >> correction into the commit history (you listening, Bruce?).
That sounds like a reasonable use for git notes. > There is git commit --allow-empty btw > >> But as Robert says, this still leaves the committers as the gatekeepers >> for the information, so it's not clear to me that this is a good way to >> solve the problems that Greg was talking about originally. I'd rather >> have a solution that offloads the work from the committers. > I don't think its that hard to write a hook which allows notes changes for a > different set of people than source changes. > Whether the people wanting to annotate commits are ok with using git I do not > know. If you want a different group of people to maintain it, then why force it into the same repository in the first place? Having to write hooks to work around things with that seems to be solving the wrong problem, imho. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
