Re: git author vs committer

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> A while ago I wanted to cherry-pick a patch from master to a back-branch
> that was initially committed by someone else. That was rejected because
> our git server requires author==committer. I don't think that
> restriction is particularly useful and should be lifted. I'm not saying
> we should let anyone be an author, but within the pool of committers, I
> think we should let the mechanics of the git tools determine these
> fields.

Just to be clear, what you're saying is we want to change the policy
that says "committer must be on list of approved committers &&
commiter==author" to "committer must be on list of approved committers
&& author must be on list of approved committers"?

Assuming that's what you meant, there is no support for that in the
scripts now, but if we agree that's a good thing it should be trivial
to add it.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/