Am Sonntag, 22. April 2007 schrieb Kevin F. Quinn:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:46:18 +0200
>
> Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, 22. April 2007 schrieb Michael Cummings:
> > > On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 08:47:54AM +0100, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> > > > I do the same. The '$Header: $
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:46:18 +0200
Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 22. April 2007 schrieb Michael Cummings:
> > On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 08:47:54AM +0100, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> > > I do the same. The '$Header: $' tells me which version of a file
> > > in the CVS tree I las
Am Sonntag, 22. April 2007 schrieb Michael Cummings:
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 08:47:54AM +0100, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> > I do the same. The '$Header: $' tells me which version of a file
> > in the CVS tree I last synced to in my overlay, then I can just do
> > a cvs diff on the tree to get a pat
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 02:22:20PM -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> Counter-case for this is that the ChangeLog should also be updated (but
> some developers aren't very good about that...), and that can be checked
> too.
Only applicable if what's being updated is an ebuild - there's also
eclasses
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 08:47:54AM +0100, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> I do the same. The '$Header: $' tells me which version of a file in the
> CVS tree I last synced to in my overlay, then I can just do a cvs diff
> on the tree to get a patch of differences since then. Very useful.
FWIW, I've used
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 12:40:42PM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> a) we are moving to GIT which doesn't cope with $Header: $ stuff
Please drop this notion.
My work on the Git mailing lists has strictly been:
- IFF Gentoo WANTED to switched to Git, how would Git have to change.
This was my posting
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 10:54:15AM -0700, Alec Warner wrote:
> PS: We aren't switching version control systems as far as I'm aware.
> Robin is just doing research into moving to git. The whole point of his
> inquiry is 'is anyone using $header in a manner than cannot be ported to
> using $blobid$
Thilo Bangert wrote:
So I'd be in favour of getting rid of them, if we make sure that
everybody always commits to the ChangeLog (Make it a repoman failure).
Side benefit of removing the need to double-commit from the hashes
changing.
i have never understood why repoman doesn't automatically pu
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:00:55 +0200
> Thilo Bangert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> I do the same. The '$Header: $' tells me which version of a file in
>>> the CVS tree I last synced to in my overlay, then I can just do a
>>> cvs diff on the tree to get a patch of differen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Fabian Groffen wrote:
> So to sum up this thread:
>
> It seems that:
> a) we are moving to GIT which doesn't cope with $Header: $ stuff
we are _not_ moving to any different scm anytime soon.
- --
==
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:00:55 +0200
Thilo Bangert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I do the same. The '$Header: $' tells me which version of a file in
> > the CVS tree I last synced to in my overlay, then I can just do a
> > cvs diff on the tree to get a patch of differences since then. Very
> > us
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:40:42 +0200
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then for b) I like to suggest to ask the portage team to simply skip the
> $Header: $ part(s) when calculating the digests, and shove that change
> in at the same time manifest1 is obsoleted and migrated into the tree
>
So to sum up this thread:
It seems that:
a) we are moving to GIT which doesn't cope with $Header: $ stuff
b) we want to avoid the "double commit" caused by $Header: $
For a) I would prefer then to remove the $Header: $ stuff until GIT is
really about to be used. In a GIT world things will change
>
> I do the same. The '$Header: $' tells me which version of a file in
> the CVS tree I last synced to in my overlay, then I can just do a cvs
> diff on the tree to get a patch of differences since then. Very
> useful.
right - but this functionality would not go away - it would just have to
be
>
> So I'd be in favour of getting rid of them, if we make sure that
> everybody always commits to the ChangeLog (Make it a repoman failure).
> Side benefit of removing the need to double-commit from the hashes
> changing.
>
i have never understood why repoman doesn't automatically put the commit
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:30:54 +0200
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 20-04-2007 08:22:42 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > does anyone actually find this useful ? i think ive used the value
> > in there like once (when in reality a `md5sum` would have worked
> > just as well) ... othe
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 08:22:42AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> does anyone actually find this useful ? i think ive used the value in there
> like once (when in reality a `md5sum` would have worked just as well) ...
> otherwise, from my perspective:
> - it causes annoying bogus hunks in diffs
Alle venerdì 20 aprile 2007, Fabian Groffen ha scritto:
> On 20-04-2007 15:45:00 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > > I use it to make deltas of changes made in the tree, and apply those
> > > deltas on the overlay I'm using. Without $Header: $ there I have no
> > > way to actually see which version I
> I thought about it some longer, and it's even nastier than just having
> to get the value in a different way, because you also have to keep the
> value in the file in your "local" version. This either means also
> storing the CVS directory (in SVN, funny :) ) or devoting the first line
> of ever
On 20-04-2007 09:11:10 -0500, Yuri Vasilevski wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:52:46 +0200
> Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Is the info you need in CVS/ ?
> >
> > That requires:
> > a) an up-to-date CVS tree checkout
> > b) a CVS tree (not a regular rsynced one)
> > c) parsing of t
On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 08:22 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> does anyone actually find this useful ?
yes quite useful.
> i think ive used the value in there
> like once (when in reality a `md5sum` would have worked just as well) ...
> otherwise, from my perspective:
> - it causes annoying bogu
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:52:46 +0200
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 20-04-2007 15:45:00 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > > I use it to make deltas of changes made in the tree, and apply
> > > those deltas on the overlay I'm using. Without $Header: $ there
> > > I have no way to actual
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> does anyone actually find this useful ? i think ive used the value in there
> like once (when in reality a `md5sum` would have worked just as well) ...
> otherwise, from my perspective:
> - it causes annoying bogus hunks in diffs
> - not uncommon for people to contact m
On 20-04-2007 15:45:00 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > I use it to make deltas of changes made in the tree, and apply those
> > deltas on the overlay I'm using. Without $Header: $ there I have no way
> > to actually see which version I'm dealing with, so which revisions to
> > retrieve for differen
On Friday 20 of April 2007 14:22:42 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> does anyone actually find this useful ? i think ive used the value in
> there like once (when in reality a `md5sum` would have worked just as well)
> ... otherwise, from my perspective:
> - it causes annoying bogus hunks in diffs
> - no
Fabian Groffen kirjoitti:
> On 20-04-2007 08:22:42 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> does anyone actually find this useful ? i think ive used the value in there
>> like once (when in reality a `md5sum` would have worked just as well) ...
>> otherwise, from my perspective:
>> - it causes annoying
does anyone actually find this useful ? i think ive used the value in there
like once (when in reality a `md5sum` would have worked just as well) ...
otherwise, from my perspective:
- it causes annoying bogus hunks in diffs
- not uncommon for people to contact me as the maintainer because i'm
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 08:22:42AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> does anyone actually find this useful ? i think ive used the value in there
> like once (when in reality a `md5sum` would have worked just as well) ...
> otherwise, from my perspective:
> - it causes annoying bogus hunks in diffs
On 20-04-2007 08:22:42 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> does anyone actually find this useful ? i think ive used the value in there
> like once (when in reality a `md5sum` would have worked just as well) ...
> otherwise, from my perspective:
> - it causes annoying bogus hunks in diffs
> - not un
29 matches
Mail list logo
