Re: linux-2.6.21-gitN - versioning question

[Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>]

[Russell King - Sat, May 12, 2007 at 05:31:41PM +0100]
| On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 08:24:28PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| > [Jan Engelhardt - Sat, May 12, 2007 at 05:01:19PM +0200]
| > | 
| > | On May 12 2007 21:44, David Woodhouse wrote:
| > | >On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| > | >> Actually I think it would be convenient if such tags (like
| > | >> v.2.6.21-git16) were in Linus' git tree too.
| > | >
| > | >Then there would be _lots_ of tags in the master tree -- I'm not sure we
| > | >want that.
| > | >
| > | >I suppose I could put a tree on kernel.org which _does_ have the tags,
| > | >and which precisely matches Linus' tree in every other way... but then
| > | >again, you could do that too by just rsyncing the tags yourself :)
| > | 
| > | Are you saying GIT tags are expensive, compared to, say, SVN tags?
| 
| (Sorry, don't have Jan's message.)
| 
| The real issue is not that, but that David doesn't have write access to
| Linus' published tree.  Neither should he because he could contaminate
| Linus' published tree with the MTD tree, or introduce some unreviewed
| patch which gave him backdoor access via the kernel.
| 
| (Of course, David's unlikely to do either, but that's not really the
| point.)
| 
| -- 
| Russell King
|  Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
|  maintainer of:
| 


The only reason I wrote some messages to this theme is that on
my point of view the using of tags like "v2.6.21-git16" would be
convenient. But that should be Linus' decision (thanks to David
for proposed solution). Anyway if Linus doesn't want to keep
a such tags in hisown tree I prefer to do the same ;)


		Cyrill