[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len
From: |
Bruce Stephens |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic |
Date: |
Fri, 03 Oct 2003 01:33:10 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Charles Duffy <address@hidden> writes:
> On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 18:26, Bruce Stephens wrote:
>> I presume humans only need to be involved when you're trying to import
>> a new tarball or something (where BitKeeper can't know how files have
>> been moved around).
>
> ...the example you provide being also useful as a case-in-point
> regarding the advantages of tags internal to the source.
Yes. (I almost commented on that.) This is a case where taglines
would be of use, and could be used by things other than arch.
I'm not sure how useful they'd be. My guess is that file renames are
relatively unusual. (Certainly they are in my experience; however,
part of that may be that we're using CVS, which doesn't handle renames
well. I don't think that's the only reason, though---it's just not
something that you want to do *that* often.)
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, (continued)
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Pau Aliagas, 2003/10/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Davide Libenzi, 2003/10/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Miles Bader, 2003/10/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Davide Libenzi, 2003/10/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Miles Bader, 2003/10/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Paul Hedderly, 2003/10/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Miles Bader, 2003/10/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Charles Duffy, 2003/10/02
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic,
Bruce Stephens <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Ollivier Robert, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Andrea Arcangeli, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Robert Anderson, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Andrea Arcangeli, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Robert Anderson, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Tom Lord, 2003/10/03
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Bruce Stephens, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Andrea Arcangeli, 2003/10/03
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Bruce Stephens, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Tom Lord, 2003/10/02