Skip to content

Update my author email to tsmith84@proton.me - #1123

Open
tas50 wants to merge 1 commit into
chef:mainfrom
tas50:update_author_email
Open

Update my author email to tsmith84@proton.me#1123
tas50 wants to merge 1 commit into
chef:mainfrom
tas50:update_author_email

Conversation

@tas50

@tas50 tas50 commented Aug 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

My Author:: headers carried two older addresses. Both now point at tsmith84@proton.me, which is already the address in cookstyle.gemspec.

Old address Occurrences
tsmith84@gmail.com 399
tsmith@chef.io 10

408 files, 409 lines. Every changed line is one of three shapes, and nothing else in the tree was touched:

-# Author:: Tim Smith (<tsmith84@gmail.com>)
-# Author:: Tim Smith (<tsmith@chef.io>)
+# Author:: Tim Smith (<tsmith84@proton.me>)

The one line that isn't a header

spec/rubocop/cop/chef/security/ssh_private_key_spec.rb used the old address as the trailing comment field of a fake SSH public key:

it 'does not register an offense with an RSA public key' do
  expect_no_offenses(<<~RUBY)
    default['jenkins-server']['dev_mode']['security']['private_key'] = 'ssh-rsa foo/bar/baz== tsmith84@proton.me'
  RUBY
end

That's test data rather than an attribution, but it's still the old address sitting in a public repo, so it goes too. tsmith84@gmail.com and tsmith84@proton.me are both 18 characters and the block is an expect_no_offenses, so no caret alignment was affected.

Verification

  • 1239 examples, 0 failures
  • rake validate_config passes
  • bundle exec cookstyle unchanged at the 11 pre-existing offenses

The Author:: headers carried two older addresses, tsmith84@gmail.com on 398
files and tsmith@chef.io on 10. Both now point at tsmith84@proton.me, which
is the address already used in cookstyle.gemspec.

One change is not a header: the Chef/Security/SshPrivateKey spec used the old
address as the trailing comment field of a fake SSH public key. It is test
data rather than an attribution, but it is still the old address sitting in a
public repo, so it goes too. The replacement is the same length and the block
is an expect_no_offenses, so no caret alignment was affected.

No other lines changed.

Signed-off-by: Tim Smith <tsmith84@proton.me>
@tas50
tas50 requested review from a team and jaymzh as code owners August 26, 2026 01:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant