XSF Discussion - 2021-03-05

  1. jonas’

    FTR: git-annotate is not an alias of git-blame, it has a slightly different output format and "exists only for backward compatibility to support existing scripts and provide a more familiar command name for people coming from other SCM systems."

  2. goffi

    Zash: there is a "hg blame" too

  3. mdosch

    Blame Canada!

  4. Zash

    goffi: that's an alias tho

  5. deuill

    `git blame` is a very Linus naming convention though

  6. deuill

    I mean the project name is a slur, only reason people don't care is because it's only ever used in British English

  7. Zash

    So we should ... blame Linus

  8. deuill

    How strange our world must seem to the people outside it, when we talk about pushing branches to git.

  9. flow

    Only for people where 'git' has a different meaning than referring to a distributed VCS.

  10. deuill

    Pretty much everyone in Britain, then.

  11. flow

    probably :)

  12. MattJ

    Linus says he named it after himself, fine. But I do find it amusing that Github picked it up and ran with it...

  13. Kev

    I hadn’t thought of the implication of my Git-WFH thing, but it does seem particularly apt, thinking about it.

  14. dwd

    "github" is a wonderful example of unintentionally accurate naming...

  15. jcbrand

    "blame" was already in subversion, maybe even CVS

  16. Zash

    > $ svn annotate -h > blame (praise, annotate, ann): [...] hah, praise 😀

  17. Zash

    I do like how hg went and made annotate the canonical one

  18. jcbrand

    Let's be honest though, how often do you want to see the author in order to praise them?

  19. Zash

    It happens.

  20. Holger

    > `git blame` is a very Linus naming convention though I remember him hating that command altogether though (but yes probably not the naming), and adding it just to make those CVS/SVN people shut up.

  21. Kev

    I use it almost every time I’m debugging something to work out why the code is as it is.

  22. Holger

    `git log -S"$code"` is usually better at that 🙂 But yes if I use `git blame` then usually to look up a commit rather than the author.

  23. Kev

    Is it? I typically want to know the complete changes, rather than just the block (doesn’t that do just the block?). But I’ve never tried it, so maybe it is.

  24. Holger

    Kev, it's better in that it spits out commits where the specified code was introduced/removed, rather than just moved around. But yes, in the rare cases where I want to look up the origins of several lines at once I do use `blame` myself.

  25. Kev

    I’ll try to remember to give it a try next time and see, ta.

  26. eta

    when doing XEP-0359 origin-ids, is the client supposed to add an <origin-id/> element to the stanza it sends?

  27. eta realised their transport just takes the "id" attribute from the <message/> and sticks that in <origin-id/>

  28. lovetox

    thats fine

  29. lovetox

    assuming your "id" is a unique id as the xep defines it

  30. lovetox

    and eta, there is no need to do this if you dont have a use case for it

  31. lovetox

    receivers cant do anything with that

  32. eta

    I mean this is about reflection

  33. lovetox

    its so the sending client can track the message

  34. eta

    but I checked the code and it seems like it just keeps the id stable and advertises #stable_id

  35. raghavgururajan

    Is MIX development active?

  36. Sam


  37. raghavgururajan

    Sam: Thanks for clarification.