[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf
From: |
Andrea Arcangeli |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic |
Date: |
Fri, 3 Oct 2003 17:38:21 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.1i |
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 08:08:48AM -0700, Robert Anderson wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 08:03, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > The metadata only makes sense when you've something like arch or
> > bitkeeper doing something useful with it
>
> I'm not going to repeat for the Nth time why this is a patently false
> statement. You can look it up.
well, I don't pretend everybody to agree on this matter, I believe I
know how you use taglines and why you use them. while merging patches
renaming files they clearly provide a feature.
After you will have patchsets armored you won't need to see the
unique-id: garbage-garbage-deadbeef-deadbeef thingy anymore just to get
the rename right, and most important you'll see the interesting patch
inlined w/o wasting space.
This is not an unsolvable problem, everything you do with taglines can
be done without, and the without way is tangibly more reliable since it
guarantees to avoid collisions (and it's cleaner too to read with eyes
IMHO).
Andrea - If you prefer relying on open source software, check these links:
rsync.kernel.org::pub/scm/linux/kernel/bkcvs/linux-2.[45]/
http://www.cobite.com/cvsps/
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, (continued)
- 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, 2003/10/02
- 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 <=
- 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
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Paul Hedderly, 2003/10/03