On Sun 9.Nov'08 at 12:28:53 -0800, John H. Robinson, IV wrote: > Carlos R. Mafra wrote: > > > > It would be really odd if the output of 'hg log' doesn't > > show you unambigously who the author is, don't you agree? > > hg log -v will show you the complete log, instead of just the headers. > hg annotate uses the user: field when showing who is responsible for > what line.
No, no, this is not sensible at all. One should not have to _search_ the commit log to know who the author of a patch is. This is the kind of information which should be really obvious from just looking at 'hg log'. You just forgot to add --user="true author" when you commited those patches, imo. Take a look at this commit here: http://hg.windowmaker.info/wmaker/rev/8640d186c4f4 and now tell me what you read as the 'author' field on the header. That is clearly wrong. And it is pointless to require someone to 'fix' mentally this error _after_ reading the commit log. That simply does not make sense. > This follows the CVS convention that had been in use for a very long > time. We don't have to repeat this confusion now that we have better tools. The correct header should look like the following http://repo.or.cz/w/wmaker-crm.git?a=commit;h=c91bb1ba1360006c568db37438779e525868cf17 and I am sure that there are Mercurial repos out there where the 'author' field is truly the author. I've just didn't search for it. To make things clear, I am not accusing you of improper authorship handling. I just wanted to point out that maybe you are not 'driving' Mercurial correctly yet :-) -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
