[PATCH V2] graft: record the user who performed the command in the extras dictionary

[Martin von Zweigbergk]

On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 2:23 PM Augie Fackler <raf at durin42.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 08:30:17PM -0700, Siddharth Agarwal wrote:
> > On 04/10/2015 07:50 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
> > >
> > > I like the intent of this patch but I'm not a fan of "graft-user." I
> > > think answering "who was the last person to 'touch' this commit" is
> > > useful beyond graft and I could see us doing something similar for
> > > other history editing commands (e.g. rebase).
> > >
> > > Thinking ahead to when we want this metadata exposed to users (think a
> > > template keyword), I'd rather we have a single entity, not N, to
> > > represent "last touched by user." "last-user?"
> >
> > Since we appear to be dancing around the obvious suggestion:
> >
> > "committer"?
> >
> > /me runs away
>
> I think you're joking, but I was actually going to suggest just that.
>

There's a proposal for a new changelog format with a proper place for
"extra" to be discussed at the sprint. Just saying...


> > _______________________________________________
> > Mercurial-devel mailing list
> > Mercurial-devel at selenic.com
> > http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20150411/71e63c70/attachment-0002.html>