> On 6 Apr 2026, at 18:09, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 11:55 AM Jacob Champion
> <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> From a mechanical perspective, that has clear advantages to me
>> (especially with the de facto GitHub interpretation), but I think it'd
>> collide with our practice of rewriting commits to maintain project
>> voice. Maybe people could get used to that change, but I generally
>> expect the Author in the Git metadata to be the *literal* author of
>> the commit message.
>
> Yes, I think that's right. I would have no problem us allowing pushing
> of commits under the actual author's name if the commit is pushed
> unchanged, but I rarely push anything unchanged and I think people
> would be very quickly become unhappy if I started doing so. In the
> rare cases where that would be warranted, the person usually just gets
> made a committer anyway.
Agreed. And we'd have similar discussions around attribution since there is
only a single Author in Git. What if two people did equal amount of work, whom
to place as Author?
> But really, that's a discussion for another time.
+INT_MAX
--
Daniel Gustafsson
