| 1 |
On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 17:17:16 -0500 Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Andrey Utkin <andrey_utkin@××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > I beg affiliated Gentoo developers to stay sane and be thinking not just |
| 5 |
> > about numbers of your commits, but also about community spirit and |
| 6 |
> > relationships. Of course inexperienced contributor gets things not right |
| 7 |
> > first. In such cases, great maintainers fix that and retain original |
| 8 |
> > authorship; good maintainers request for changes and resubmission. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> ++ |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I'd have to hunt for where it is written down, but it can't be said |
| 14 |
> enough. We should definitely be trying to acknowledge the |
| 15 |
> contributions of others whenever possible. It is really the only |
| 16 |
> recognition a lot of "external" contributors get, and it is the least |
| 17 |
> we can do. This isn't about copyright or policy or anything like |
| 18 |
> that, but just a nice thing to do, and there is no "threshold" that |
| 19 |
> external contributors need to make. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> I wouldn't ascribe to malice what is probably just the result of |
| 22 |
> oversight, but it is a good reminder whatever the case may be... |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
One more reason to use merge commits for pull requests: original |
| 25 |
author commits with proper authorship will be retained. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Yes, I know that some people are unhappy with non-linear history, |
| 28 |
but this is how git works, so there is nothing wrong with merge |
| 29 |
commits for user-contributed changes. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Best regards, |
| 32 |
Andrew Savchenko |
Archives