From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Please don't use revision numbers on commit messages (and elsewhere). Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:12:56 -0400 Message-ID: <87fwq1v1sn.fsf@stupidchicken.com> References: <877hbfvwyo.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87tyeivni1.fsf@wanadoo.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1301710398 10027 80.91.229.12 (2 Apr 2011 02:13:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 02:13:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 02 04:13:06 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5qKn-0001jY-KW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 02 Apr 2011 04:13:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54666 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q5qKm-00014o-VA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:13:04 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34570 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q5qKh-00011n-JS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:13:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5qKg-0007hI-L7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:12:59 -0400 Original-Received: from vm-emlprdomr-06.its.yale.edu ([130.132.50.147]:44778) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5qKg-0007hD-ID for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:12:58 -0400 Original-Received: from furball (dhcp128036014187.central.yale.edu [128.36.14.187]) (authenticated bits=0) by vm-emlprdomr-06.its.yale.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p322Cu3H018467 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 1 Apr 2011 22:12:57 -0400 Original-Received: by furball (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6B9F4160365; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 22:12:56 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87tyeivni1.fsf@wanadoo.es> (=?utf-8?Q?=22=C3=93scar?= Fuentes"'s message of "Fri, 01 Apr 2011 02:11:50 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.71 on 130.132.50.147 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 130.132.50.147 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:138048 Archived-At: =C3=93scar Fuentes writes: > The Emacs project has a number of branches published on a well-known > site, and hopefully other branches distributed along a number of > personal machines. I'm saying that using revision numbers is confusing > when those revisions are merged across branches. Across *any* branches, > including the "random" ones (whatever your definition of "random branch" > is.) Most commit messages containing revision numbers seem to refer to things like reverting the changes in a prior revision. Here, there is not much scope for ambiguity, so I think the practice is acceptable.