On Mar 11, 2014, at 8:08 PM, Evan Huus <eapa...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Hadriel Kaplan > <hadriel.kap...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >> Any way we could have the "v1.11.0-rc1-1917" portion automatically put into >> the gerrit review once it's been cherry-picked into master/master-x.x? >> >> Like if a script is currently generating the "Change has been successfully >> cherry-picked as ..." message, then have it append the 'git describe' output >> to that message? > > I don't understand how that would help end-users? They don't get the > full commit message, just the SHA...
I'm assuming we would copy from that into the bugzilla comment when we close a ticket, similar to how "fixed in r2345" was done before. Basically it's a way to let me (a developer fixing a bug) know what to copy into the bugzilla ticket when I close it. Putting it in the commit means we can always find it later too, and I assume we'd get it in the gitweb views/logs and gerrit code review page too for that matter. I'm also assuming the main downloads page would indicate the full string for its releases, or at least that "1917" number, as the automated builds download page does today. (or in release notes/whatever) Of course to be useful, we need to change the version info shown by Wireshark/tshark to say "1917" where it currently says an unknown SVN rev number. So let's say a user finds a bug, they go look on bugzilla and find it's already fixed, and the resolved-fixed comment would say "Fixed in v1.10.5-rc1-1234-g3ddb100". They go check their local version, which is "1.10.6" so bigger than "v1.10.5" so they're good. Or else they have v1.10.5 in which case they check if their revision number is >= 1234. Or they have a different release altogether, in which case the "revision" number is just as meaningful as it was in SVN (which is to say, not much apparently). If the bug says "Fixed in v1.11.3-rc1-1234-g345f00b" they know they either need to get a wireshark 1.11.4, or a 1.11.3 of rc > 1, or a v1.11.3-rc1 of > 1234. If all else fails, they can ask on ask.wireshark.org, and someone looks up the g345f00b on code review, where it will (hopefully) have not only that "v1.11.3-rc1-1234-g345f00b" string, but also other versions if it was backported to. -hadriel ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
