[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@h
From: |
Pau Aliagas |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic) |
Date: |
Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:42:42 +0200 (CEST) |
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> tla is the thing that track down the changes and permits to send a
> rename aware diff.
Usually arch projects are distributed with the arch information in their
tar.gz releases. You can of course eliminate all the arch files before
packaging, but I don't think you should.
> > People recommended you to use tagline instead of exlicit beacause it's a
> > superset of its functionality: you can do the same (tag manually or stric
> > commit as you like t call it) and ou can have tags in your files.
>
> My question is why do I need the tag in the files if tla does everything
> automatically already? You acknowledge I've to tag-move explicitly
> anyways for the strict commit to work.
In no way I acknowledge this, not at all. You can have "strict commit"
with tagline or explicit, undistinctively, if you state that
untagged-source = junk.
> > Moreover, imagine that I start feeding you a new driver for the kernel.
> > Probably I'd stick a tagline inside :) and you'd have to live with it.
> >
> > Better let both trees be "star-mergeable". And this will happen, peopl
> > will start tagging their linux trees from the master one.
> >
> > There's no automatic procedure for moving from one method to the other, so
> > that if you chose one, You'll have to stick with it (or suffer a massive
> > delete/add).
> >
> > Please, think twice about it. If want to have a master arch tree of the
> > linux kernel, it would much better with taglines, even if most of the
> > files are explicitly tagged.
>
> I'm not convinced.
Choosing the tagline tagging method , you have a superset of explicit, so
you give more freedom to people tagging from the archive. It has no
implications for you: you use explicit for your files, I use tagline for
the files I send. I's that easy. I don't like to tla mv :)
> There's no technical reason for why taglines should be better. Even the
> "send the patch to Linus that renames something" isn't optimal with
> taglines, you want to send a "patchset ascii armored" instead with a
> standard protocol to define renames, and even things like directory
> creation or file deletion that patch can't express. As for the problem
> of import from CVS, that's because Larry isn't exporting the rename
> metadata in a standard format.
You mixup things. The generated patchset is no diffferent in any case.
Try mkpatch.
> My point is that there's no technical reason for requiring to merge data
> with metadata, except to avoid running move-tag after moves, but I
> prefer that people is forced to run move-tag, so the probability of
> screwed commits is lower and on the long run it can pay off. The renames
> are frequent but really not *that* frequent (at least in linux) to
> really require an automated parsing during commit. I bet BK also forces
> explicit tagging, and I never heard a single complaint.
I only advocate for a bit more of freedom: create the archive with tagline
method, add explicitly all the files, but leave the door open to new
contributions coming in the form of inlined tags. You lose nothing.
Pau
- [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, Miles Bader, 2003/10/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Tupshin Harper, 2003/10/02
- 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, Tupshin Harper, 2003/10/02
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Miles Bader, 2003/10/02
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Tupshin Harper, 2003/10/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Andrea Arcangeli, 2003/10/03
- [Gnu-arch-users] taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Pau Aliagas, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Charles Duffy, 2003/10/03
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Andrea Arcangeli, 2003/10/03
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic),
Pau Aliagas <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Davide Libenzi, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Andrea Arcangeli, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Davide Libenzi, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Andrea Arcangeli, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Robin Farine, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Zack Brown, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Davide Libenzi, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Robert Collins, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Zack Brown, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit (was Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic), Robin Farine, 2003/10/03