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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).