Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch

[Robert Anderson]

On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 22:51, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Sep 2003, Miles Bader wrote:
> 
> > Davide Libenzi <address@hidden> writes:
> > > > > Personally I do see some of Andrea points. I'm using explicit tagging
> > > > > because, like Andrea, I do want to commit strictly.
> > > >
> > > > What is the source of this canard?  What does "strict commits" have to
> > > > do with explicit tagging?  Please explain your thought process.
> > >
> > > I do fairly often use-and-trash C (or Perl or whatever) test source
> > > files that are used to test something and that I do not want to be
> > > included in my commits.
> >
> > ... so use `tagline; untagged-source junk'
> >
> > result: files random are not committed unless you explicit tag them (via
> > `tila add' or by adding a tagline).
> 
> I know, but what's the point of having tagline for me ? I will never use
> the tag-line: inside my sources and I will always require an add-tag with
> my usage pattern. Look, I'm not saying to nuke tagline. I'm just saying
> that tagline+tricks == explicit for me.

"I'm using explicit tagging... because I want to commit strictly" is
like saying "I chose to buy a Volkswagen because I insist on diesel
fuel."  It simply doesn't follow.

And untagged-source is not a "trick" anymore than any inventory
parameter is a "trick."

Bob

PS Never say never.