I am aware of that (and have previously made commits like that myself). If you would like, I can add that info. However, when using a cherry-pick workflow (as opposed to manually copying a patch), all that information is automatically available - the git-svn-id line included in the commit message implies that it's from Standard, and the original author is preserved as the author of the commit (along with the author date; only the commiter and commit date reflect that I am applying these changes now). When there are no conflicts, the commit is made immediately without me ever touching the commit message.
Another thing that I have encountered are places where I have made non-trivial changes to resolve conflicts. In these cases I have been adding my own comments to the original commit messages, as shown below. (This also shows what "git log" returns without specifying "--format==fuller", or similar.)
commit 715550271750076e106f91b62302418ae4c5d087 (HEAD -> merge-from-standard)
Author: Dwachs <dwachs@gmx.net>
Date: Sat Feb 22 14:53:28 2014 +0000
sqapi: export lines
ACarlotti: Commented out new functions using WAYTOLL
git-svn-id: svn://tron.homeunix.org/simutrans/simutrans/trunk@7081 8aca7d54-2c30-db11-9de9-000461428c89
I have considered moving the added line(s) to below the git-svn-id, but I think it would make little difference either way.
You assume correctly that I have not pushed them yet; I saw no value in doing so at this stage, and having them only stored locally means I can go back and directly amend the commits I have already made without all the issues that can arise once those commits are public. My plan at the moment is to check almost all commits to see that they build, and to check that the game seems to run fine at regular intervals, including before pushing to Github. Once I've made significant progress (e.g. ported a major feature), then I'll start asking people to tell me what I've broken.
So, given the above information, would you still like the commit messages amended as you state above? I think there is still a distinction to be made between bulk import of Standard features (as I'm doing now), compared to manual transfer of patches (as has otherwise been happening in the past four years). I don't intend to remove the git-svn-id line, which includes the Standard release number, so the commit messages would already look different to those for manually transferred patches. A further (minor) disadvantage is that manually editting all the commit messages would mean a small increase in workload.