Thread: git config user.email
We need to decide what email addresses committers will use on the new git repository when they commit. Although I think we have more votes (at least from committers) for always having author == committer, rather than possibly setting the author tag to some other value, the issue exists independently of that. I believe we want to try to set things up so that committers will not need to change the email address they are using to commit even if their employment situation changes. Because if that happens, then it becomes more difficult to keep track of who is who. My initial suggestion was to say that everyone should just be username@postgresql.org; but I think that met with some resistance. Magnus, for example, tells me that he is a committer for multiple projects, and is magnus@hagander.net at all of them. Since that's a domain name he owns personally, it seems safe enough. But I'm inclined to think we should avoid things like rhaas@commandprompt.com, just on the off chance JD decides to fire me. Of course, I expect there might be some dissenting voices on this point, so... thoughts? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
Robert Haas wrote: > We need to decide what email addresses committers will use on the new > git repository when they commit. Although I think we have more votes > (at least from committers) for always having author == committer, > rather than possibly setting the author tag to some other value, the > issue exists independently of that. I believe we want to try to set > things up so that committers will not need to change the email address > they are using to commit even if their employment situation changes. > Because if that happens, then it becomes more difficult to keep track > of who is who. > > My initial suggestion was to say that everyone should just be > username@postgresql.org; but I think that met with some resistance. > Magnus, for example, tells me that he is a committer for multiple > projects, and is magnus@hagander.net at all of them. Since that's a > domain name he owns personally, it seems safe enough. But I'm > inclined to think we should avoid things like rhaas@commandprompt.com, > just on the off chance JD decides to fire me. > > Of course, I expect there might be some dissenting voices on this > point, so... thoughts? > > Do we care that much? I agree it should probably be something permanent, and so that could rule out employment based addresses, but it doesn't strike me as a big deal. cheers andrew
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jul 21 12:54:36 -0400 2010: > My initial suggestion was to say that everyone should just be > username@postgresql.org; but I think that met with some resistance. > Magnus, for example, tells me that he is a committer for multiple > projects, and is magnus@hagander.net at all of them. Since that's a > domain name he owns personally, it seems safe enough. But I'm > inclined to think we should avoid things like rhaas@commandprompt.com, > just on the off chance JD decides to fire me. I have a mild preference of alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org over @postgresql.org. If other committers are going to use personal addresses, I'll use mine as well.
> My initial suggestion was to say that everyone should just be > username@postgresql.org; but I think that met with some resistance. > Magnus, for example, tells me that he is a committer for multiple > projects, and is magnus@hagander.net at all of them. Since that's a > domain name he owns personally, it seems safe enough. But I'm > inclined to think we should avoid things like rhaas@commandprompt.com, > just on the off chance JD decides to fire me. > > Of course, I expect there might be some dissenting voices on this > point, so... thoughts? I'd prefer username@postgresql.org since: - It's permanent as already pointed out - It'd make clear that "username" is working as one of PostgreSQL project members Personal email addesses such as magnus@hagander.net would be ok as long as he is sure that he will continue to pay charges for his domain:-) -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > We need to decide what email addresses committers will use on the new > git repository when they commit. Are you are aware that we already have a list of "approved" addresses for the committers? -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:04, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> We need to decide what email addresses committers will use on the new >> git repository when they commit. > > Are you are aware that we already have a list of "approved" addresses > for the committers? Are you referring to the mapping list for the git mirror, or something else? -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:04, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >>> We need to decide what email addresses committers will use on the new >>> git repository when they commit. >> >> Are you are aware that we already have a list of "approved" addresses >> for the committers? > > Are you referring to the mapping list for the git mirror, or something else? Yes, the mapping list. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
On tor, 2010-07-22 at 09:18 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:04, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> We need to decide what email addresses committers will use on the new > >>> git repository when they commit. > >> > >> Are you are aware that we already have a list of "approved" addresses > >> for the committers? > > > > Are you referring to the mapping list for the git mirror, or something else? > > Yes, the mapping list. The mapping list was originally composed by me on a whim based on what I thought people's email addresses tended to be. It wouldn't hurt to ponder Robert's points at this time.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:33, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: > On tor, 2010-07-22 at 09:18 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:04, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> We need to decide what email addresses committers will use on the new >> >>> git repository when they commit. >> >> >> >> Are you are aware that we already have a list of "approved" addresses >> >> for the committers? >> > >> > Are you referring to the mapping list for the git mirror, or something else? >> >> Yes, the mapping list. > > The mapping list was originally composed by me on a whim based on what I > thought people's email addresses tended to be. It wouldn't hurt to > ponder Robert's points at this time. Agreed. And per the discussion at the developer meeting, even if we don't limit what can be used, we should at least give committters a chance to pick a different address from the one they are on that list with today. *Personally*, I'd prefer to keep using my main email address for commits. This is what I use for all other projects (postgresql or others) that I commit or contribute to. It's an address on a domain I own, and fully control. It's a pretty clear indication of my "identity" in the opensource world, whereas close to nobody would know who mha@postgresql.org is. Plus, email to it tends to be delivered much quicker and more reliably than the @postgresql.org one - though that has improvied significantly lately. But I can also see Roberts point. If a committer doesn't have a *stable* address, we won't be able to track this committer through time. Say if he changes job and gets a new address, we can start using that one for new commits, but not for old ones. And since we grant commit status to the *person* and not the representative of a company, using a company email address doesn't quite match up there. When it comes to using generic @gmail.com or whatever addresses, that's somewhere in between. For a lot of people, those can definitely be considered stable, because a change in employment, a move to a different country, things like that, won't affect the email address (which it would be if it was an ISP-specific one for example - that might not transfer to a new country or even a new city). -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 5:41 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:33, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: >> On tor, 2010-07-22 at 09:18 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >>> > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:04, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>> >> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> We need to decide what email addresses committers will use on the new >>> >>> git repository when they commit. >>> >> >>> >> Are you are aware that we already have a list of "approved" addresses >>> >> for the committers? >>> > >>> > Are you referring to the mapping list for the git mirror, or something else? >>> >>> Yes, the mapping list. >> >> The mapping list was originally composed by me on a whim based on what I >> thought people's email addresses tended to be. It wouldn't hurt to >> ponder Robert's points at this time. > > Agreed. And per the discussion at the developer meeting, even if we > don't limit what can be used, we should at least give committters a > chance to pick a different address from the one they are on that list > with today. > > > *Personally*, I'd prefer to keep using my main email address for > commits. This is what I use for all other projects (postgresql or > others) that I commit or contribute to. It's an address on a domain I > own, and fully control. It's a pretty clear indication of my > "identity" in the opensource world, whereas close to nobody would know > who mha@postgresql.org is. Plus, email to it tends to be delivered > much quicker and more reliably than the @postgresql.org one - though > that has improvied significantly lately. > > But I can also see Roberts point. If a committer doesn't have a > *stable* address, we won't be able to track this committer through > time. Say if he changes job and gets a new address, we can start using > that one for new commits, but not for old ones. And since we grant > commit status to the *person* and not the representative of a company, > using a company email address doesn't quite match up there. > > When it comes to using generic @gmail.com or whatever addresses, > that's somewhere in between. For a lot of people, those can definitely > be considered stable, because a change in employment, a move to a > different country, things like that, won't affect the email address > (which it would be if it was an ISP-specific one for example - that > might not transfer to a new country or even a new city). As for me, I'd much prefer to be rhaas@postgresql.org than robertmhaas@gmail.com. While it's true that I'm unlikely to lose control of robertmhaas@gmail.com, I might decide I'm no longer happy with their service, or whatever. Assuming I stay on the sysadmin team's good side, rhaas@postgresql.org can always be repointed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 5:41 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>> *Personally*, I'd prefer to keep using my main email address for
>> commits.
> As for me, I'd much prefer to be rhaas@postgresql.org than
> robertmhaas@gmail.com.
"Prefer" is exactly the key word here. I see no reason not to let each
committer exercise his personal preference as to which address to use.
We should suggest that reasonably stable ones be chosen, but it's not
the project's business to make that decision for people. And in any
case it's impossible to be sure of the longevity of email addresses
more than a few years out, unless your crystal ball works a lot better
than mine.
(My own take is that I absolutely refuse to use tgl@postgresql.org as
a primary mail address. Its spam filtering is nearly nonexistent.
What comes through there is not *quite* filed directly to /dev/null
here, but it's darn close to that.)
regards, tom lane