From: Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
bitkeeper-users@bitmover.com
Subject: Re: linuxppc trees, what is going on ?
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 10:43:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040119174330.GI13454@stop.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040119173000.GA24440@iliana>
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 06:30:00PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 10:22:51AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > Yeah, but the point is, i am not sure if i am the person most
> > > appropriate to checking which of all those changeset are needed or not.
> > > A proper tagging would be much more appropriate, and make for easy
> > > reference when getting feedback and such.
> >
> > A proper tagging, for distribution use, isn't possible 100% of the time.
> > For example, if the tree goes from v2.4.29 to v2.4.30-pre1 to
> > v2.4.30-pre2 all while myself/Paul/Ben are on vacation, theres no way
> > to bring the bitkeeper tree, as of v2.4.30-pre1 and v2.4.30-pre2 into
> > linuxppc-2.4 and make a tag for each. Likewise, if we don't grab the
> > bitkeeper tree at exactly v2.4.30-pre2, we can't make a tag that
> > corresponds to exactly that.
>
> Ohh. So this should be attributed to bitkeeper brokeness then ?
I think it's just a design issue. You can't export as a bitkeeper tree
a bitkeeper tree at a given revision because it would be too much work,
or something. I don't know for certain. Can anyone on the
bitkeepr-users list shed some light on why there's no 'bk export -tbk' ?
Or is there a functional equivalent that I don't know?
--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-19 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-10 8:41 linuxppc trees, what is going on ? Sven Luther
2004-01-12 1:21 ` Paul Mackerras
2004-01-12 7:32 ` Sven Luther
2004-01-13 17:06 ` Tom Rini
2004-01-13 17:18 ` Sven Luther
2004-01-13 17:35 ` Tom Rini
2004-01-14 8:55 ` Sven Luther
2004-01-18 12:21 ` Sven Luther
2004-01-19 15:29 ` Tom Rini
2004-01-19 15:47 ` Sven Luther
2004-01-19 15:58 ` Tom Rini
2004-01-19 16:38 ` Sven Luther
2004-01-19 16:48 ` Tom Rini
2004-01-19 17:07 ` Sven Luther
2004-01-19 17:22 ` Tom Rini
2004-01-19 17:30 ` Sven Luther
2004-01-19 17:42 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2004-01-19 17:48 ` Tom Rini
2004-01-19 17:49 ` Sven Luther
2004-01-19 17:53 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2004-03-15 10:31 ` linuxppc latest ? Armin Schindler
2004-03-16 6:38 ` Kumar Gala
2004-01-19 17:43 ` Tom Rini [this message]
[not found] ` <20040123154058.GA15605@work.bitmover.com>
2004-01-23 15:49 ` linuxppc trees, what is going on ? Tom Rini
2004-01-13 17:04 ` Tom Rini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040119174330.GI13454@stop.crashing.org \
--to=trini@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=bitkeeper-users@bitmover.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=sven.luther@wanadoo.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.