Re: Source tree tidy

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>]

On 04/03/14 16:45, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 04:18:49PM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> On Tue, 2014-03-04 at 12:20 +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 04/03/14 06:27, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>>>> The signed tags cover 4.1.0-rc1 thru 4.2.0-rc4, missing the releases
>>>>> themselves, so are not particularly interesting to verify.
>>>> Since the release (and therefore sigs) would have been made on the
>>>> X.Y-testing.hg tree perhaps the release tags will be in the release
>>>> branch version of the file? Although maybe the original hg->git
>>>> conversion didn't pick that up?
>>> They have indeed, and the 4.1 and 4.2 trees have further signatures in
>>> them.  4.3, 4.4 and unstable hg trees all have the same set of sigs,
>>> which do not include the releases.
>> Perhaps this is an artefact of the git->hg translation used on 4.3
>> onwards, i..e it only picks up the sigs which are visible from the
>> master branch. Perhaps Anthony knows, although I'm not sure how much
>> effort it is worth expending here...
> That's correct, if the tags was not in master, it won't be visible, like
> any other files.
>
> Also, I tryied to look at exporting tags from git to hg, it was a bit to
> complicated, because it required a commit in hg that does not exist in
> git.
>

Yes - the lack of tags in the hg mirrors is an annoyance, but I can see
why it is a pain to manage.  We (XenServer) do manage without them on
the testing.hg trees.

~Andrew