From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Uday S Reddy Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Please don't use revision numbers on commit messages (and elsewhere). Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:00:11 +0100 Message-ID: References: <877hbfvwyo.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87tyeivni1.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87ei5mvij7.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1301652058 16813 80.91.229.12 (1 Apr 2011 10:00:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 10:00:58 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 01 12:00:54 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 1Q5b9u-0001LN-4z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 12:00:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46329 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q5b9t-0006Ng-Ev for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 06:00:49 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=59210 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q5b9o-0006ND-Mf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 06:00:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5b9n-0005uV-T5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 06:00:44 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:57539) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5b9n-0005uJ-NM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 06:00:43 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5b9j-0001EI-Cs for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 12:00:39 +0200 Original-Received: from cpc10-harb6-0-0-cust112.perr.cable.virginmedia.com ([92.232.137.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 12:00:39 +0200 Original-Received: from u.s.reddy by cpc10-harb6-0-0-cust112.perr.cable.virginmedia.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 12:00:39 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 26 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: cpc10-harb6-0-0-cust112.perr.cable.virginmedia.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 In-Reply-To: <87ei5mvij7.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 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:137980 Archived-At: On 4/1/2011 2:59 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > That's only because so far, people don't lose push races often enough > for it to matter. Commits that from your point of view are on the > mainline really are on local branches until you succeed in pushing. > If you use a bound branch, you're saved from that, true (this is not > entirely trivial, but I'm pretty sure in practice it will be true). > But bound branches suck for anything much bigger than a typo fix. I am still trying to understand how bad this problem is. If the cross-references are to revision numbers in the trunk or to other revisions in the local branch, then things are clear, right? For example, a reference to revision 1123 in a branch labeled 1121.2.x has to be 1121.2.2. When references have to be made to branches other than the trunk or the local branch then, yes, using revision ids would be better. But, why require them for everything? The "push race" affects things only if one is assuming that the current branch will get committed at a particular place on the trunk? Well, why would any one assume such a thing anyway? Cheers, Uday