Abdelrazak Younes <you...@lyx.org> writes:
| Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Pavel Sanda <sa...@lyx.org> writes:
>>
>>
>>> Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>>>
>>>> As for refering to a svn revision instead of a git branch, this is
>>>> a different mental model indeed, but not not a loss of function
>>>> IMHO.
>>>>
>>> to me this depends on what kind of development model you use and given
>>> the number of lyx developers and the way we proceed i think the centralized
>>> way is the better one.
>>>
>>
>> For users that (try to) help us find bugs (and we need these people),
>> saying "it did work at r1234" is easier that giving a hash (isn't this
>> how a git state is defined? here I show my ignorance about it).
>>
>> To make things clearer, there is some merit to the increasingness of the
>> svn revision numbers (in two different branches at a time). From what I
>> understand about git, it is lost in the new world.
>>
>
| Not quite true. In a git world, a bug fixing would _always_ happen in
| a specific branch and be merged to the main repo when it's done; at
| which point you can tag the main repo with "bug xxx" or feature "xxx".
| And you can point the user to this tag: "it did work before tag xxx".
| The main repo will not have gazillion commits to refer to, only branch
| merging points. The idea is that any feature or bug is developped in a
| separate branch. I believe tag is much more meaningful to the user
| than svn revision number.
>
| IOW, this is a different mental model and nothing is lost from svn, really.
That is only one way of using git...
--
Lgb
