From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Smirnov Subject: Re: Git drawbacks? Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 08:31:48 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <32541b130911060849s2d8f13f5sb9b8390f075f8d15@mail.gmail.com> <32541b130911060951q3358ce9ahe28fb0cf902853f2@mail.gmail.com> <20091109154816.GH27126@dpotapov.dyndns.org> <20091109183404.GI27126@dpotapov.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Nov 10 09:32:22 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1N7m9G-00054i-5x for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:32:22 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752773AbZKJIcJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2009 03:32:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752613AbZKJIcJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2009 03:32:09 -0500 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:44831 "EHLO lo.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752549AbZKJIcI (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2009 03:32:08 -0500 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1N7m96-00051z-Hw for git@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:32:12 +0100 Received: from 212.92.145.7 ([212.92.145.7]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:32:12 +0100 Received: from divis1969 by 212.92.145.7 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:32:12 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-Loom-IP: 212.92.145.7 (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US) AppleWebKit/532.0 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/3.0.195.27 Safari/532.0) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Dmitry Potapov gmail.com> writes: > Yes, but then I do not see any reason to do any time consuming building > and testing in the working tree. I create a snapshot of the interesting > version using 'git archive' and then run build&test on it... In this > way, I can make sure that the archive I deliver is tested properly. If > you do your testing in the working tree, sometimes uncommitted or some > other files that are left over from previous builds may affect result. > So, if it takes considerable time anyhow, why do not do clean build and > test? And if you worry about compilation time, you can use ccache. It is not clear for me. Yes, I have to get some fixed version to reproduce the bug reported by someone. Then I need to fix it and commit the change back (on the head). Also, it is obvious to reproduce the issue and test the fix on the tip. Can do this with 'git archive'? BTW, doesn't 'git archive' sync to some version that I probably already have in other clone? ;-)