Re: Moving GLib and GTK+ to git

2009/4/6 Kristian Høgsberg <krh redhat com>:
> On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 02:28 +0200, Philipp wrote:
>> </lurk>
>> Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
>> > Just an update on my plan to possibly rebase the gtk+ repo: not going to
>> > happen.  What we have now is a good compromise between keeping all
>> > history in the most correct form and how much work we want to put into
>> > it.  Again, no data is lost, we just have a few tags with some extra
>> > files in them.
>> How about deleting the broken tags from the git repos and keeping a
>> little note somewhere buried deep in the docs/ dirs. Someone who cares
>> about digging through history (like me) will then know to hit the
>> historical CVS / SVN repositories for these specific missing tags.
>> Its not like someone is going to re-roll tarballs from these tags ever
>> again (or at least the chance is ~ ɛ).
> I don't see a good reason to delete the tags.  They take virtually no
> storage, and are mostly accurate except for the extra files.  Last but
> not least, they're a great help when browsing through history since most
> repo viewers will annotate commits with the tag or branch if one or more
> exists (for example, the GTK_2_16_0 tag on this page:

It would be better if you used more git compliant tags like "v2.16.0".
Those tags make sense, but "BEFORE_FEDERICO_FILENAME_ENTRY_MERGE"... I
don't think so.

Felipe Contreras

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]