What's missing from our changelogs [LWN.net]

What's missing from our changelogs

Posted Jul 24, 2013 21:46 UTC (Wed) by ohrn (guest, #5509)
Parent article: What's missing from our changelogs

Where there is imperfection, there is room for improvement — though improving the signoff chain will be difficult as long as the tools do not allow it.

git notes are made for this, it's a shame they didn't standardize on adding signoffs and other tags as notes once the feature matured.

What's missing from our changelogs

Posted Jul 25, 2013 9:40 UTC (Thu) by anmoch (subscriber, #85760) [Link]

You can have, and show, multiple notes refs (collections of notes) at the same time. You can also merge changes to notes refs. What's really missing right now is a "good", predefined sharing scheme(*), and a good use-case.

It seems like the kernel collecting further signoffs and similar tags could provide the latter. I can try to get the ball rolling, but it would help massively if a group of interested kernel devs would volunteer as guinea pigs :-)

(*) you can share them by manually configuring push/fetch specs.

What's missing from our changelogs

Posted Jul 25, 2013 17:46 UTC (Thu) by jiiksteri (subscriber, #75247) [Link]

git notes are made for this, it's a shame they didn't standardize on adding signoffs and other tags as notes once the feature matured.

As git notes are stored in a separate ref in the repo (which is what makes them not alter history in the first place), you also have to tag and sign the note ref separately if you want to trust any notes information.

No idea if faked signoff attempts are that big a problem though :)