From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from solo.franken.de (pD9051D7B.dip.t-dialin.net [217.5.29.123]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 406C26126 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:37:08 -0700 (MST) Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:35:05 +0100 From: Thomas Bogendoerfer To: Grant Grundler Cc: Paul Bame , parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] 2.5 kernel and CVS -- opinions? Message-ID: <20011212233505.C1998@solo.franken.de> References: <200112120429.VAA03750@puffin.external.hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <200112120429.VAA03750@puffin.external.hp.com>; from grundler@puffin.external.hp.com on Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 09:29:25PM -0700 Sender: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org Errors-To: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 09:29:25PM -0700, Grant Grundler wrote: > Paul Bame wrote: > > It's time to start tracking the 2.5 kernel at cvs.parisc-linux.org > > and there are a few different ways to do it -- I'm looking for opinions. > > My favorite option at the moment is 1A. > > I'm ok with 1A as well: I don't have a hard opinion whether having two tree makes more sense than trunk/branch hoping. People will probably work for some time on 2.4 and switch over to 2.5, so I guess two trees are ok. > o *someday*, I hope the CVS date-based check out will get fixed. > o TAGs work and I'm ok with tag being used. tags are sometimes nice, but too much tags aren't. Try a cvs log with hundreds of tags. That's not funny. And btw. tags are (re-)movable and they don't have a history, which makes them pretty useless for any serious build system. At work we use seperate cvs controlled sourcelists, which lists every file with its revision of a release. That way it's always possible to rebuild an old release even if a dork moved/removed a tag. > o We could TAG weekly (or monthly) and keep enough nightly > checkout's to cover two or three tags. Or whatever we can > afford for diskspace. I don't see a point for needing that. But maybe I'm just overlooking something. I personaly wouldn't touch 2.5 at the moment. Right now 2.5 looks to me like an adventure park of out of control kids. That's ok but IMHO it doesn't help Linux/PARISC development. Hunting generic bugs mixed with architecture bugs isn't fun. Let's wait until 2.5 settles and Linus will accept PARISC inclusion (which he won't at the moment). Thomas. -- Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessary a good idea. [ Alexander Viro on linux-kernel ]