On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 11:02:49AM -0500, Bob Gustafson wrote: > On 08/27/2016 10:55 AM, Chris Pavlina wrote: > > >On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 05:48:45PM +0200, jp charras wrote: > >>Le 27/08/2016 à 17:14, Chris Pavlina a écrit : > >>>Now that we've migrated from bzr, there isn't much reason to keep > >>>attaching a (now fake) bzr revision number to the version string. > >>>Additionally, we can choose a sensible default branch name if one isn't > >>>specified on the cmake line, rather than "product". This patch reformats > >>>the version strings to: > >>> > >>>(2016-08-26 revision 67230ac)-master > >>> | | | > >>> | | custom branch name if set. Otherwise, > >>> | | branch name, "HEAD" if not on a branch, > >>> | | or "unknown" if no .git present > >>> | | > >>> | abbreviated commit hash, or no-git if no .git > >>> | present > >>> | > >>> date of commit, or date of build if no .git present > >>I find the bzr revision number useful to easily know the order of revisions. > >>the name bzr is now a bit strange, so the version string could be: > >> > >>(2016-08-26 rev 1234 git 67230ac)-master > >> > >>(users, many times, just give a rev number, no the full version string, so > >>in a bug or mail, rev > >>1234 has meaning, but revision 67230ac has no meaning, at least for me). > >Just use the date! That's why it's there. If a user told me he had an > >issue with rev 1234 I have no idea how I'd go about converting that to a > >git commit now that bzr is gone. It's meaningless now except as a > >sequence, and...that's what the date is for! > This assumes that there is at most one revision per day..
Sure, if you're trying to pin down an _exact_ commit...but how does the fake bzr revno help you there? The bzr repo isn't used anymore, it's not like you can just check the bzr log for it. All you need is a sense of how old it is. If you need something more fine-grained you're going to need to look at the exact commit _anyway_. I really would like someone to explain to me how these fake bzr revision numbers are useful _when the commits themselves aren't tagged with them_. If I give you "revision 7423", you can't just go jump to that revision, it's only useful in the context of "this is older than this build 7992 I have", and I don't think many of us are keeping around multiple builds from the same day... > > Bob G > > > >>-- > >>Jean-Pierre CHARRAS > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
