Sure but how is git (or other tools) supposed to know this "explicit ownership transfer" is even happening?
It can't, so it should punt. But if it's going to punt, empty symbol (or some default like "dingus") should be allowed for committing in flows like the one I described.
How is it supposed to validate the "correct" author? How is git supposed to know that "Foo typed
'Linus'" and not Linus or that Linus isn't correcting a commit erroneously attributed to Foo? It's the commiter's responsibility to do that. git and its wrappers can (well, must) trust the commiter to provide that info. But an API and a UI can make that more or less explicit. If Gitlab says "Committed by Foo, who attributes the code to Bar", I'm going to start an inquiry about smelly code with Foo. If it says "Authored by Bar," one can easily draw the wrong conclusions. -Jonathan
On Thursday, May 5, 2016 2:24 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
On 05/04/2016 11:54 PM, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-dev wrote:
Hi list,Just a quick demo showing abuse of git's globals:https://puredata.osuosl.org/jwilkes/purr-data/commit/186d1f3064aa65869c850fb...
i'm afraid you are late for the party - http://www.jayhuang.org/blog/pushing-code-to-github-as-linus-torvalds/ - https://github.com/aguerrero/Faking-Git-Commits - https://mikegerwitz.com/papers/git-horror-story
gfmrdsa IOhannes
PS: a while ago i created that ms word document explaining how open source is better and then i put "Bill Gates" as the author. hehe, seems like it worked https://github.com/Microsoft
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@lists.iem.at https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev