From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jason Rumney Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Release tags Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 22:55:52 +0800 Message-ID: <87r4qga58n.fsf@gnu.org> References: <04A8931A-A044-4F8A-86FD-7AA70DA2B5E3@mit.edu> <87d32awhc7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wr0aldw0.fsf@gmail.com> <83pq62ec1i.fsf@gnu.org> <87fw6x505b.fsf@gnu.org> <87mx15lr1k.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87y5kpydsr.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1346856993 24164 80.91.229.3 (5 Sep 2012 14:56:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:56:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andreas Schwab Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 05 16:56:35 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T9H1q-0008KE-KH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 16:56:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53871 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9H1n-0005L3-LQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 10:56:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:37287) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9H1c-0005KA-RW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 10:56:26 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9H1T-00086W-DT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 10:56:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pb0-f41.google.com ([209.85.160.41]:43774) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9H1T-00086E-6d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 10:56:07 -0400 Original-Received: by pbbro12 with SMTP id ro12so1186114pbb.0 for ; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 07:56:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=eRZzZEklUV+79dLXImD194hFk4vYxtLemekTfZIFaO0=; b=dlKdlQp2sVRUX8P/nnUjA30rb23M/Gqy+RMn/fW2mhj75NTit9ENhv5mwQfWy/tphs ZZQ2R/Reu3PqQ/vSQfSgpDJwIa0W/KVDFidBED53zWBgoxsUBbU1FSEFT+lOCbNIwpd5 cLAX/35GRD0tKmZQYYojj4tCReiKvCh71N9gN6obl3YgZgfyytgUqLZu0KDY2mNOMwQH 6npXQc8g1vvCqD9BVtNPn9oIRCUEE9TXF82svc4w/Bp4MLr9h9EznVvD7eCdMBcSNpJp KxM0N1MEbboPqLvvao7xAfC8I5ZjTdMpdIqFR0s2dxYd2swl+9Tf+mJON4Vex9AJMrxJ WLcQ== Original-Received: by 10.66.72.197 with SMTP id f5mr49609736pav.20.1346856965702; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 07:56:05 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from home.jasonrumney.net ([180.75.154.97]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id po4sm1596609pbb.13.2012.09.05.07.55.59 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 05 Sep 2012 07:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by home.jasonrumney.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7EDAD1FAC; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 22:55:53 +0800 (MYT) In-Reply-To: (Andreas Schwab's message of "Tue, 04 Sep 2012 19:47:09 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.85.160.41 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:153049 Archived-At: Andreas Schwab writes: > Jason Rumney writes: > >> No use of a tag that I have ever seen was for a revision. It was for the >> state of the source tree at that point in time. > > A revision _is_ a state of the tree at one point in time. Except when you merge that revision onto another branch, some here seemed to be saying the tag would be merged with it, which makes no sense to me, because after the merge what gets checked in should be a different revision (even though the patch from the previous revision to the new one is the same between branches, the content of the tree is different).