From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 87845 invoked by alias); 24 Dec 2019 18:14:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 87837 invoked by uid 89); 24 Dec 2019 18:14:54 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=lifetime, Distinguishing, schemes, company X-HELO: gate.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (HELO gate.crashing.org) (63.228.1.57) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Dec 2019 18:14:48 +0000 Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id xBOIEjQ2012390; Tue, 24 Dec 2019 12:14:45 -0600 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id xBOIEi1C012389; Tue, 24 Dec 2019 12:14:44 -0600 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2019 18:14:00 -0000 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Joseph Myers Cc: Roman Zhuykov , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, esr@thyrsus.com Subject: Re: Test GCC conversion with reposurgeon available Message-ID: <20191224181444.GJ4505@gate.crashing.org> References: <28ca5dbe-a29e-7f1e-a599-d80709643421@ispras.ru> <20191224155543.GH4505@gate.crashing.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-12/txt/msg00397.txt.bz2 On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 05:16:54PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Tue, 24 Dec 2019, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > That's because that commit also edits ChangeLog entries from other > > > authors. When a commit adds / edits ChangeLog entries for more than one > > > author (the difference between purely editing an existing entry and adding > > > a new one, possibly under an existing date/author header, for a > > > multi-author commit, is not something that can reliably be determined > > > automatically), the conversion falls back to using the committer identity > > > instead of picking one of the multiple relevant authors from the ChangeLog > > > files. > > > > There is only one relevant author in r270511. It edits a few wrong path > > names in the previous changelog entries. People often do similar things > > (like fixing the commit date :-) ) > > Distinguishing "edits a previous ChangeLog entry" from "adds a new entry > under a previous ChangeLog header for a change included in the commit" is > a human judgement. We are doing only one conversion here, the one of the GCC repo. The heuristic works, we checked it did. > > Either never use @gcc.gnu.org, or always use it, don't do the > > worst of both worlds? > > The heuristics here are to use an attribution from ChangeLog for the > author where unambiguous, but to use the committer (always @gcc.gnu.org / > @gnu.org [*], so avoiding attributions at the wrong company even where > people were using multiple addresses simultaneously for different changes) > as author if in doubt. You never need that, and it is worse to use two different schemes than to choose either. I would have chosen the "@gcc.gnu.org" scheme, because it is simple and *correct*. Other people wanted the nicer names. Maxim's conversion gets that correct. Please copy it. If your tool isn't sure what to do, use human intervention. For example, make up a heuristic, and check that exhaustively. We have only one repo to convert! And people do *not* have the same email address for the whole lifetime of the repo. This would mean I can never again contribute to GCC if I start using a different email address after the conversion! Segher