XSF Discussion - 2021-03-05

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."

Zash: there is a "hg blame" too

Blame Canada!

goffi: that's an alias tho

`git blame` is a very Linus naming convention though

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

So we should ... blame Linus

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

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

Pretty much everyone in Britain, then.

probably :)

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

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

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

"blame" was already in subversion, maybe even CVS

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

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

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

It happens.

> `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.

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

`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.

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.

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.

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

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

thats fine

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

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

receivers cant do anything with that

I mean this is about reflection

its so the sending client can track the message

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

Is MIX development active?

Yes

Sam: Thanks for clarification.