From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] fsck: check tag objects' headers Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 19:43:27 -0400 Message-ID: <20140829234327.GF24834@peff.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Aug 30 01:43:36 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XNVpN-0001ft-Kt for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 01:43:33 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751000AbaH2Xna (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Aug 2014 19:43:30 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:33498 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750908AbaH2Xn3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Aug 2014 19:43:29 -0400 Received: (qmail 13382 invoked by uid 102); 29 Aug 2014 23:43:29 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 18:43:29 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 29 Aug 2014 19:43:27 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 02:25:16PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > We inspect commit objects pretty much in detail in git-fsck, but we just > > glanced over the tag objects. Let's be stricter. > > > > This work was sponsored by GitHub Inc. > > Is it only this commit, or all of these patches in the series? > Does GitHub want their name sprinkled over all changes they sponsor? GitHub does not really care either way. I think it is well-known that we sponsor some git development (i.e., pretty much everything I and Michael work on), and we do not need that fact sprinkled in the commit history. But we are also happy for that fact to be transparent if it changes people's opinions on whether the patch is a good idea (i.e., to know that Johannes has some motive beyond just "I think this is the right thing to do"; I hope he _also_ thinks it is the right thing to do or would not post the series, of course). Personally, I think the cover letter is a good place for such things. -Peff