From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `about-emacs' - what about the revno? Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:39:51 +0200 Message-ID: <87tymcq9so.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <83occmlogo.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1283190682 8279 80.91.229.12 (30 Aug 2010 17:51:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:51:22 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 30 19:51:20 2010 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 1Oq8Vs-0005xT-Hd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:51:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60033 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oq8Ls-0006OH-IM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:41:00 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=35753 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oq8L3-000674-Cw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:40:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oq8L1-0000ni-Px for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:40:09 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:59617) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oq8L1-0000nR-IS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:40:07 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oq8Kv-0006In-2t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:40:01 +0200 Original-Received: from 83.38.73.98 ([83.38.73.98]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:40:01 +0200 Original-Received: from ofv by 83.38.73.98 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:40:01 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 19 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.38.73.98 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:iZjH5YG07IpEORtKU6154stXyBU= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:129438 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: >> This has come up before, but the discussion was inconclusive (IIRC) >> because of 2 reasons: > >> . revno is not unique: two different branches can have the same >> revno for two very different code bases > > Maybe we should try and provide the revno of the common ancestor on > the trunk. That information only makes sense for mirrors of trunk. The revision-id is the real info. The fact that it is inconvenient to handle is no excuse for doing the wrong thing. And revnos are definitely the wrong thing to look at when determining which source code was used for a build. [snip]