From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3C961F62D for ; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 19:27:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754308AbeGGT1P (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jul 2018 15:27:15 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:46257 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754150AbeGGT1P (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jul 2018 15:27:15 -0400 Received: from MININT-6BKU6QN ([89.204.154.202]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MY3Ho-1fXZQy2qmG-00UvOf; Sat, 07 Jul 2018 21:27:08 +0200 Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2018 21:27:07 +0200 (DST) From: Johannes Schindelin X-X-Sender: virtualbox@gitforwindows.org To: Junio C Hamano cc: Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/20] linear-assignment: a function to solve least-cost assignment problems In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <39272eefcfe66de3ca1aa2ee43d6626ce558caae.1530617166.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21.1 (DEB 209 2017-03-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:Q6D5fr/jTtkBrN2k2kwWmFvgikp1uPy8uml0bVyohMVaj6VCvMy Yu2w8hvY18f0uFhe+FbkodmX1ujE/sqUhNHNibB0HUFc3YUy36yL8yFclJl6kjA3p9JxHEA SpF2wIbnsmWf7gaiUL2YFtd2URmrGrh8Eqk7HclrD2w0IU2e9fL4+yR7BJF5xC3wv4rSZat GtKSRk4ZeeASqdIvDQWYw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:QPb8O74pWY0=:ZLwXdN4BYZ5DuwGChIaxiY BL78/J8nzQIOsDBNu2azAsvmXW2MZdw+I948cBwAjgcUcbrSQ3wIil5FzDA9aIeERs5MuswF5 uJyVdiLz0/HF0aZM3T/ydXe8DVWFHPiGAUQIFNvZoZ09zEBwwMNZgj90BFT0uhXwl2oFzPc9B C4WjKlTYodwNTn5A3MbhMeGWTCrlPtyyWhTGtEpGAzNjrpipmLBPlwHwpB0NMQxZRzdvcDBn8 8Rp6qcyjcaTh6Z5/goWoTi0bBK1gjajAACi7zfV5O6UxEbMkGelCPm9g+TrgiibSuCnzX7s6Z eXQcH9M7IsR41H5VMi8U+/sDBI5dDeXr7cpW5LYsSIzZ28Zey1mwf+VhuKtKbU5rp65UD78KL cAxpkMdZyAtptPJlP+Jh+wrKfM+7BEMXyfYEnZRlhWXhG7qGRS69Fj0NcOYpIIP3rdskSEAEk MbBc1nYcLDJpF2z+2NcGOuatJ1eJKQILVH5gOm4a0g7YPbIx4+gv0QToYeYvOieqV/xWykcYi aL4uBLHHbJWkrcIllZuBrOeawkSka7DrgHE0kGtGzr72rluSw0B66DxulrkOJwih7musqooZY loA4z1a/yYQTENiBWvcEeb3TNRud0lS9oTWok84xY/BfzRCKkJuTe+Ac2CuJnJrg5SHSAG7rv PQENxocET0ruZlC75mJDb5t9gVeCPHnUMy95XVwaMyLqDNyip2P9piGbVpWFtn43U2iZ0pitE fNfaZ0GzCzfT01jReeU2JnbFQCqurbzy1akfqJ0hW2TarD29QDUFOJ01Kpmhlp9MMNwhr8PrJ JE7Sy/i Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi Junio, On Sat, 7 Jul 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > >> Does the "gitgitgadget" thing lie on the Date: e-mail header? > > > > No, GitGitGadget takes the literal output from `git format-patch`, as far > > as I can tell. So if at all, it is `format-patch` that is lying. > > format-patch faithfully records the fact about the commit that is > made into the patch. How pieces of information should (or should > not) be used depends on the purpose of the application that uses > its output. I guess this is one of the fallouts for abusing the `format-patch|am` dance for `rebase--am`. > I'd suggest to match what send-email does, which is to notice but > use the current date when adding a Date: header. An option to lie > to SMTP servers may be OK but I do not think we want to encourage > such a behaviour by making it the default. I opened a PR to add a TODO: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/gitgitgadget/pull/15 > What is missing in the core-git tools is an ability to tell > send-email to optionaly add an in-body header to record the author > date of the original. We add an in-body header that records the > real author when it is different from the sender automatically, and > it is OK to have an option to allow doing so (but not encouraged > around here---it is easier to reason about the resulting history for > everybody, perhaps other than the original author, to record the > first time you show the change to the public as the author time). Pull Request-based workflows keep the original author date all the time. If that is not desired, we need to do more than paper over it by adjusting `send-email`. Ciao, Dscho