Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Does anyone know how do git notes propagate from one repo to another?
> I'm not sure that they are copied on "git push".
> If they don't, they would be pretty useless, so I assume there must be a
> way.
[ googles... ] According to
http://progit.org/2010/08/25/notes.html
Excerpts from Andres Freund's message of sáb jul 02 10:19:07 -0400 2011:
> On Saturday, July 02, 2011 06:10:43 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > I wouldn't have a problem with establishing a convention that we
> > write credits in commit messages in a more standardized way, ie put
> > something like "Author:
Tom Lane wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> > On Sat, Jul 02, 2011 at 03:45:03PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >>> There are git notes which you can attach to a commit after the fact... I
> >>> like
> >>> the fact that they would keep the information in the repository (where
> >>> they
> >>
On Sunday, July 03, 2011 09:18:52 PM Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 20:04, Andres Freund 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
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 20:04, Andres Freund 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
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
> ma
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> On Sat, Jul 02, 2011 at 03:45:03PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> There are git notes which you can attach to a commit after the fact... I
>>> like
>>> the fact that they would keep the information in the repository (where they
>>> seem to belong).
>> Yeah, but I
On Sat, Jul 02, 2011 at 03:45:03PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > There are git notes which you can attach to a commit after the fact... I
> > like
> > the fact that they would keep the information in the repository (where they
> > seem to belong).
>
> Yeah, but I think it's still basically append
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On Saturday, July 02, 2011 06:10:43 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> I wouldn't have a problem with establishing a convention that we
>> write credits in commit messages in a more standardized way, ie put
>> something like "Author: Joe Blow " in the bod
On Saturday, July 02, 2011 06:10:43 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> I wouldn't have a problem with establishing a convention that we
> write credits in commit messages in a more standardized way, ie put
> something like "Author: Joe Blow " in the body of the
> commit message. However, the points that were ra
[ I'm a bit late to the party on this thread, but anyway: ]
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>> On 06/24/2011 03:28 PM, Christopher Browne wrote:
>>> I expect that the correlation between commit and [various parties] is
>>> something that will need to take
On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 13:42:04 -0400
Robert Haas wrote:
> As for annotating the commit messages, I think something like:
>
> Reporter: Sam Jones
> Author: Beverly Smith
> Author: Jim Davids
> Reviewer: Fred Block
> Reviewer: Pauline Andrews
Can I just toss in one little note from the sidelines?
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 13:42:04 -0400
> Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> As for annotating the commit messages, I think something like:
>>
>> Reporter: Sam Jones
>> Author: Beverly Smith
>> Author: Jim Davids
>> Reviewer: Fred Block
>> Reviewer: Paul
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> On 06/24/2011 03:28 PM, Christopher Browne wrote:
>> I expect that the correlation between commit and [various parties] is
>> something that will need to take place outside git.
>
> Agreed on everything except the "Author" information that is al
Greg Smith wrote:
> I tend not to think in terms of solutions that involve web applications
> because I never build them, but this seems like a useful approach to
> consider. Given that the list of tags is pretty static, I could see a
> table with a line for each commit, and a series of check b
On 06/24/2011 03:21 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
If I were attacking this problem, I'd be inclined to make a web
application that lists all the commits in a format roughly similar to
the git API, and then lets you tag each commit with tags from some
list (feature, bug-fix, revert, repair-of-previous-co
On 06/24/2011 03:28 PM, Christopher Browne wrote:
I expect that the correlation between commit and [various parties] is
something that will need to take place outside git.
Agreed on everything except the "Author" information that is already
being placed into each commit. The right data is
Greg Smith wrote:
> On 06/24/2011 04:52 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > That tagging is basically what I do on my first pass through the release
> > notes. For the gory details:
> >
> > http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2009.html#March_25_2009
> >
>
> Excellent summary of the process I was
On 06/24/2011 04:52 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
That tagging is basically what I do on my first pass through the release
notes. For the gory details:
http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2009.html#March_25_2009
Excellent summary of the process I was trying to suggest might be
improve
On Jun 24, 2011, at 2:28 PM, Christopher Browne wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>> On 06/24/2011 01:42 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I am not inclined to try to track sponsors in the commit message at
>>> all.
>>
>> I was not suggesting that information be part of the com
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> > On 06/24/2011 01:42 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> I am disinclined to add a "feature"
> >> annotation. ?I think it is unlikely that will end up being any more
> >> useful than just extracting either the whole commit message
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> On 06/24/2011 01:42 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I am not inclined to try to track sponsors in the commit message at
>> all.
>
> I was not suggesting that information be part of the commit. We've worked
> out a reasonable initial process for the p
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> On 06/24/2011 01:42 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I am disinclined to add a "feature"
>> annotation. I think it is unlikely that will end up being any more
>> useful than just extracting either the whole commit message or its
>> first line.
>
> I d
On 06/24/2011 01:42 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
I am disinclined to add a "feature"
annotation. I think it is unlikely that will end up being any more
useful than just extracting either the whole commit message or its
first line.
I don't see any good way to extract the list of commits relevant
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> There's been a steady flow of messages on pgsql-advocacy since last month
> (threads "Crediting sponsors in release notes?" and "Crediting reviewers &
> bug-reporters in the release notes") talking about who/how should receive
> credited for the
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> -All of these other ways to analyze of the contributors would be much easier
> to maintain. A little "Author:" decoration to that section of each commit
> would probably be welcome too.
I think you're quite right, that "mining" the commit logs
There's been a steady flow of messages on pgsql-advocacy since last
month (threads "Crediting sponsors in release notes?" and "Crediting
reviewers & bug-reporters in the release notes") talking about who/how
should receive credited for their work on PostgreSQL. That discussion
seems to be me h
27 matches
Mail list logo
