From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Tcv6m-00044g-4x; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 10:36:08 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qAPLLjp6017817; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 21:21:45 GMT Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 10739-04; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 21:21:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qAPLLYUE017811 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 25 Nov 2012 21:21:35 GMT Message-ID: <1353878494.21863.26.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Otavio Salvador Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 21:21:34 +0000 In-Reply-To: References: <1353691611.1361.28.camel@ted> <1353699909.7352.2.camel@ted> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: bitbake-devel , Constantin Musca , openembedded-core Subject: Re: RFC: Versioning of git recipes (and incremental PR) X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:36:12 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sat, 2012-11-24 at 11:55 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Richard Purdie > wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-11-23 at 17:23 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote: > >> I like to idea of a single updating place. What I dislike is AUTOINC > >> not being taken care in the fetcher. > >> > >> In this case any GIT revision changes, the AUTOINC won't bump as usual > >> (without PR server)? > > > > Why do you need AUTOINC to bump? The only reason we have increments in > > the fetcher is for package upgrading... > > Yes but in this case the fetcher won't change AUTOINC and you'll have > same revision even when changing SRCREVs. This will break the upgrade > path for people not using PR server, no? We're going to need the PR server for upgrade paths in future regardless so that shouldn't be an issue. Cheers, Richard