From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Please don't use revision numbers on commit messages (and elsewhere). Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 12:34:33 +0200 Message-ID: References: <877hbfvwyo.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87tyeivni1.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87k4fevkc1.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 1301654128 28117 80.91.229.12 (1 Apr 2011 10:35:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 10:35:28 +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 Fri Apr 01 12:35:23 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 1Q5bhI-00008t-KU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 12:35:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39828 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q5bhI-0006gh-0B for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 06:35:20 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=56509 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q5bhD-0006gc-6V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 06:35:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5bhB-0006Z6-Vy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 06:35:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-gy0-f169.google.com ([209.85.160.169]:50377) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5bhB-0006Z2-SK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 06:35:13 -0400 Original-Received: by gyd8 with SMTP id 8so1632195gyd.0 for ; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 03:35:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ky9+PFhuZK8LLH2W0V5LaXodDGeaKcCkU9H4m//1PUY=; b=RDpESHsqfXkH8C21Z/8pmzgqbA+kziiwrFwhk+Po/eVK4rXPmKM3n4SL+CvY1KnqTJ jp8KQJsH69IuS9jFqyZfSwcIAPfGP6IDYa2kyOcz0G01h8PvNEp0G6YLCXdFBY7ucH2m 29Ju8yPfgq22u6Fgrb8wIEJB9JkR26NKxeU9o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=HzP+3Ae7VUj/kVV4HLF1ClBiDBp0j0vptWKZpO/fyDhS92E0v3HMqe0HYgO+0i+OTg zDqg+sUA2fqReyJQieLwEOg2x0Mw4KlS+4arJxspZqzjuyY5Iw3kVFYBDjTn6ufgHVRN fHyL1TvXfe27/g49a8SAcSBcI5UbIXGCH1QsU= Original-Received: by 10.146.114.26 with SMTP id m26mr292807yac.30.1301654113217; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 03:35:13 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.147.182.17 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 03:34:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87k4fevkc1.fsf@wanadoo.es> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.160.169 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:137984 Archived-At: On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 03:20, =C3=93scar Fuentes wrote: > Anyone can setup a public repo anytime, anywhere. Let's think of a > long-lived feature branch of the type of lexbind or bidi which, for > whatever reason, the participating developers finds more convenient to > host outside of Savannah. I think Eli has already answered that: if/when it happens, we can discuss how to minimize the problems. Until now, it is entirely hypothetical. > In the case of patches, using revision ids on the commit messages is, > actually, most convenient, because on that case the referenced ids are > unambiguous no matter on which branch the patch is applied. "Unambiguous" does not mean "I have it accessible and I know which branch it refers to". Are you defending using revids because they are unique, or because you don't like to having around multiple branches? > On a distributed project, you don't know how many active branches exist > out there. Last time I checked, Emacs wasn't a "distributed project". It is a centralized project with a distributed tool that helps developers. > Let me expand with an example based on my past* experience. I have a > number of heterogeneous machines (different OS, varying network > connectivity, etc) and on all of them I have Emacs running (of > course!). I've my private branch with some customizations, which is what > I use for building and installing Emacs on all those machines. Keeping > the private branch mirrored among all of them means work. Keeping > mirrors for `trunk', emacs-23 and what-not is too much of a burden (last > time I checked there was no simple & reliable method for synchronizing > sets of branches across multiple platforms.) Sorry, you lost me here. "trunk, emacs-23 and what-not" can be mostly summarized to "trunk, emacs-23 and nothing else", *unless* you're actively tracking window-pub, lexbind-new or some other branch, which most people (even developers) apparently don't do. If we maintained dozens of branches, all of them vibrant with activity, I could buy it. But we use a development branch and a release branch, and a few almost-private-development-branches-that-nobody-tracks, and that doesn't seem likely to change in the near future. > Do you prefer to wait until the problem has manifested itself on all its > crudeness? :-) Sure I do. And you know why? Because Bazaar revnos are *convenient*, and Bazaar revids are a royal PITA. I don't want to abandon convenient shorthands for what, at the moment, is just FUD. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Juanma