On 06.02.2023 13:21, Luca Fancellu wrote: >> On 6 Feb 2023, at 10:01, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: >> On 03.02.2023 10:30, Luca Fancellu wrote: >>> origin_path: relative path in the original project, mostly linked to the >>> original_revision field >>> >>> origin_revision: revision of the changes in the repository when this file >>> was taken. >> >> I guess this needs clarifying: What revision is meant here? The one >> originally >> imported, the one last updated from, or yet something else? Keep in mind that >> we may also be selectively importing changes, in which case any particular >> "revision" can easily end up misleading. The format likely also wants >> specifying, e.g. (like we do for Fixes: tags) the first 12 digits of a commit >> hash. For said selective updating this might then allow for something like >> <base-hash>+<cherry-pick>+... > > This is a good point, what would it be the best format in your opinion? > Maybe we should have the field as an array of revisions? > > "origin_revision": [ > "Revision of latest backport”, > [...] > "originally imported revision”, > ] > > What should be the best to capture the history of the file?
That would be taking the 2nd step before the 1st one. For now we need to determine _what_ information we want to record. Then we can determine how to best represent it. Jan
