From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ulrich Mueller Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Git snafu Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 08:10:43 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87a5ywcf1g.fsf.ref@yahoo.com> <87a5ywcf1g.fsf@yahoo.com> <86cz3rheta.fsf@aarsen.me> <83edo7uriq.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="19622"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.3 (gnu/linux) Cc: Arsen =?utf-8?Q?Arsenovi=C4=87?= , jporterbugs@gmail.com, luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 26 08:12:15 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1prYNz-00050Z-8k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 26 Apr 2023 08:12:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1prYMq-0001qJ-3g; Wed, 26 Apr 2023 02:11:04 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1prYMn-0001pk-BU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Apr 2023 02:11:01 -0400 Original-Received: from woodpecker.gentoo.org ([140.211.166.183] helo=smtp.gentoo.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1prYMk-0005ZD-Ju; Wed, 26 Apr 2023 02:11:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <83edo7uriq.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 26 Apr 2023 08:44:13 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=140.211.166.183; envelope-from=ulm@gentoo.org; helo=smtp.gentoo.org X-Spam_score_int: -41 X-Spam_score: -4.2 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT=0.01, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:305674 Archived-At: >>>>> On Wed, 26 Apr 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> It might be viable to compare the committer against the ACLs for >> emacs.git or such. The authors can vary widely, but the committer >> should usually be somebody that can write to the repository. > But the committer's name, as recorded in the Git logs, is really of no > special interest to us. Only the author's name and email address are > of interest. The access rights to the Git repository are checked by > Savannah, and if the commit was successfully pushed, that check > succeeded, regardless of what's in the log. But you'd catch errors due to bad configuration (as the one in question) where both author and committer tend to be wrong.