Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 13:03:06 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@FreeBSD.org> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no> Cc: Brian Feldman <green@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 identcpu.c src/sys/i386/isa clock.c Message-ID: <19990624130306.G13759@bitbox.follo.net> In-Reply-To: <xzphfnyf4qs.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>; from Dag-Erling Smorgrav on Thu, Jun 24, 1999 at 09:16:11AM %2B0200 References: <199906240348.UAA02888@freefall.freebsd.org> <xzphfnyf4qs.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jun 24, 1999 at 09:16:11AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Brian Feldman <green@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> > Reviewed by: msmith
> > Obtained from: unfurl & msmith
>
> Incorrect use of 'Obtained from'. The 'Obtained from' field is for
> when you merge in patches from {Net,Open}BSD. You should have used
> 'Submitted by' and specified Bill and Mike's complete e-mail addresses
> (and real names if known):
Actually, old consensus was to use just the account name if the
person(s) that did the submit had an account on freefall, so green is
following the consensus.
However, given the spread of (necessary) account deletion, account
renaming and .nofinger files, I'm starting to wonder if we should
either request that people use full e-mail addresses, and/or keep a
web-page with all past and present @FreeBSD.org addresses mapped to
person (and possibly alternative e-mail address for the "past"
entries).
What do the people think?
Eivind, intentionally not moving this to -chat due to wanting all
committers to have a chance to join the discussion.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990624130306.G13759>