How about naming this explicitly pushers?

Which info is this? It's not the pusher, since that's not available in git.

It could either be the author of the patch or the committer, so you should probably determine which it is and rename this.

For example, check 99% of the patches in the mainline kernel: the pusher is Linus, the committer is the maintainer of the specific subsystem, and the author is 99% of the time someone else.

Also, if you're going to extract this info, maybe you could also add all the other tags like Reviewed-by, so we have that information available in fedmsg?

Reviewed-by

This one is only available within the commit message so that'd be a no-go for me.

As for what it is, I actually believe I'm returning the authors rather than the pusher:
https://pagure.io/pagure/blob/master/f/pagure/lib/git.py#_890-903

This one is only available within the commit message so that'd be a no-go for me.

Well, if you pass a field called "users", I would say they should be added as they're users involved in the specific patch.

As for what it is, I actually believe I'm returning the authors rather than the pusher: https://pagure.io/pagure/blob/master/f/pagure/lib/git.py#_890-903

Fair enough, then I'd suggest naming this authors.

Fair enough, then I'd suggest naming this authors.

wfm

Perhaps a future issue would be to rename the internal lib name for this to make it clear.

ack

Reviewed-by: Patrick Uiterwijk puiterwijk@redhat.com

I'll fix it before we merge to avoid dragging more technical debt into the project :)

Looks good to me

Thanks :)