On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 14:24:24 -0400 Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 2:09 PM, hasufell <hasuf...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > Signed-off-by has a completely different purpose which is not part > > of our workflow, so that tag is pretty useless to us most of the > > time. > > > > See https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Talk:Gentoo_git_workflow#Sign-Off > > > > I agree. Generally it is used to signify agreement to a developer > certificate of origin. I would recommend using it for any other > purpose, especially since there has been talk of instituting a DCO for > Gentoo (based on the Linux DCO). We're not at the point of doing that > just yet, but I wouldn't stick something entirely different in that > field so that if we do institute a DCO we end up doing it differently > than every other project that uses Git. > > If we want to capture this it should go in its own header. If the > goal is to capture the repoman version, then I'd just capture the > repoman version, or some identifier for the set of rules repoman was > checking against at the moment (I'm not sure if repoman uses any kind > of data updated outside of portage releases). > It does not other the the metadata.dtd file it checks for updates and updates itself with. But that is very likely to change with the rewrite I have in progress (albeit slowly). I have also seriously been contemplating splitting off it's release from the main portage package. Most users don't ever use repoman. Plus once the plugin system and checks data downloads are in place, there will be far less need for updates and releases. I would still keep it part of the portage repository due to it's ties to the codebase. Just release it as a separate installable package. -- Brian Dolbec <dolsen>
