From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:30:00 +0100 To: Tom Rini Cc: Sven Luther , linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org, Paul Mackerras Subject: Re: linuxppc trees, what is going on ? Message-ID: <20040119173000.GA24440@iliana> References: <20040113171827.GA13841@iliana> <20040113173513.GE10912@stop.crashing.org> <20040118122134.GA4994@iliana> <20040119152954.GD13454@stop.crashing.org> <20040119154758.GA23038@iliana> <20040119155801.GF13454@stop.crashing.org> <20040119163857.GB23613@iliana> <20040119164849.GG13454@stop.crashing.org> <20040119170741.GA23943@iliana> <20040119172251.GH13454@stop.crashing.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 In-Reply-To: <20040119172251.GH13454@stop.crashing.org> From: Sven Luther Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: 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 ? > On the other hand, it's not that hard to decide which changes are > appropriate and which are not. Using the real example of v2.4.24, all > of the changes inbetween are for generic things, or possibly ppc64. All > of those can be backed out. Yeah, but ideally, all distribution maintainers should use the same set of changelogs for what should be considered > > We all started digging into the kernel someplace :) > . Yeah. The problem i have is that most people which use my debian packages use pmac, and i can't test it on those, since i don't have this hardware. Oh, well, now that i understand things better, i will try to go sorting the changesets or something. But still, a tag would be welcome. Friendly, Sven Luther ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/