Christopher Allan Webber skribis:
> Leo Famulari writes:
>
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:17:19PM +0300, Alex Kost wrote:
>>> Leo Famulari (2016-02-21 07:35 +0300) wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:05:36PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> >> I prefer 7! This is how Git usual
Leo Famulari writes:
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:17:19PM +0300, Alex Kost wrote:
>> Leo Famulari (2016-02-21 07:35 +0300) wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:05:36PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> I prefer 7! This is how Git usually truncates SHA1s, so it can’t be
>> >> wro
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:17:19PM +0300, Alex Kost wrote:
> Leo Famulari (2016-02-21 07:35 +0300) wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:05:36PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> [...]
> >> I prefer 7! This is how Git usually truncates SHA1s, so it can’t be wrong.
> >
> > I stumbled across this e
Leo Famulari (2016-02-21 07:35 +0300) wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:05:36PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
[...]
>> I prefer 7! This is how Git usually truncates SHA1s, so it can’t be wrong.
>
> I stumbled across this email earlier, which reminded me of this
> discussion about hash lengths:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:05:36PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Leo Famulari skribis:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:40:41AM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> >>
> >> Leo Famulari writes:
> >>
> >> > That sounds good to me. There was some discussion of how much of the
> >> > hash to keep her
Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>
>> Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
>>
>>> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>>>
+
+It is a good idea to strip commit identifiers to, say, 7 digits so that
+they do not become aesthetically disturbing (assuming aesthetics have a
+role to pla
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>>
>>> +
>>> +It is a good idea to strip commit identifiers to, say, 7 digits so that
>>> +they do not become aesthetically disturbing (assuming aesthetics have a
>>> +role to play here.) It is best to use the full
Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>
>> +
>> +It is a good idea to strip commit identifiers to, say, 7 digits so that
>> +they do not become aesthetically disturbing (assuming aesthetics have a
>> +role to play here.) It is best to use the full commit identifiers in
>> +@code{ori
Andy Wingo skribis:
> On Thu 21 Jan 2016 22:25, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> +2.0.11-3.deadbeef
>
> I thought you were vegetarian :) 2.0.11-3.cabba9e has 7 digits.
I like this more, indeed! Thanks for the valuable feedback. :-)
Ludo’.
Andy Wingo writes:
> On Thu 21 Jan 2016 22:25, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> +2.0.11-3.deadbeef
>
> I thought you were vegetarian :) 2.0.11-3.cabba9e has 7 digits.
>
> Andy, clearly providing very key and crucial feedback
This vegetarian approves of this crucial change :)
~~ Ric
On Thu 21 Jan 2016 22:25, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> +2.0.11-3.deadbeef
I thought you were vegetarian :) 2.0.11-3.cabba9e has 7 digits.
Andy, clearly providing very key and crucial feedback
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 04:08:24PM -0600, Eric Bavier wrote:
> On 2016-01-21 15:25, l...@gnu.org wrote:
>
> My only issue with the attached patch is that the commit identifier in the
> example is not 7 digits (characters?) as recommended.
Maybe it'd be better to just round it up to 8 and keep the
On 2016-01-21 15:25, l...@gnu.org wrote:
Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
Ben Woodcroft writes:
On 12/01/16 19:26, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
[...]
So, a Git snapshot’s version number could be:
2.0.11-3.deadbeef
^^^
||`— upstream commit ID
||
|`—— 3rd
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> +
> +It is a good idea to strip commit identifiers to, say, 7 digits so that
> +they do not become aesthetically disturbing (assuming aesthetics have a
> +role to play here.) It is best to use the full commit identifiers in
> +@code{origin}s, though, to avoid ambiguiti
Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
> Ben Woodcroft writes:
>
>> On 12/01/16 19:26, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
[...]
>>> So, a Git snapshot’s version number could be:
>>>
>>>2.0.11-3.deadbeef
>>> ^^^
>>> ||`— upstream commit ID
>>> ||
>>> |`—— 3rd Guix package r
Leo Famulari skribis:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:40:41AM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>>
>> Leo Famulari writes:
>>
>> > That sounds good to me. There was some discussion of how much of the
>> > hash to keep here:
>> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2015-12/msg00136.html
>> >
>
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:40:41AM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>
> Leo Famulari writes:
>
> > That sounds good to me. There was some discussion of how much of the
> > hash to keep here:
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2015-12/msg00136.html
> >
> > I like this method that I've s
Ben Woodcroft writes:
> On 12/01/16 19:26, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
>>
>>> Would it make sense to separate our version identifier from the actual
>>> release version with a different character than “.”? Or should this be
>>> discussed elsewhere as it hasn’t anything to
Leo Famulari writes:
> That sounds good to me. There was some discussion of how much of the
> hash to keep here:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2015-12/msg00136.html
>
> I like this method that I've seen in some of the packages, because it
> keeps the version tidy while preservin
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 02:51:29PM +1000, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
>
>
> On 12/01/16 19:26, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> >Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
> >
> >>Should we also take some time to reconsider how we name unreleased
> >>versions like arbitrary git commits?
> >Let do that!
> Lets.
> >>So far we have
On 12/01/16 19:26, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
Should we also take some time to reconsider how we name unreleased
versions like arbitrary git commits?
Let do that!
Lets.
So far we have been picking the latest release version (or “0.0.0” if
there hasn’t been any release)
Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
> Should we also take some time to reconsider how we name unreleased
> versions like arbitrary git commits?
Let do that!
> So far we have been picking the latest release version (or “0.0.0” if
> there hasn’t been any release) followed by “.” and either a date or a
> guix
22 matches
Mail list logo
