[email protected] writes:
> Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> > - rather than scraping the files from the CGit website (which does not
>> > guarantee that the first scraped file will be from the same revision as
>> > the last scraped file), I would very strongly prefer the files to be
>> > copied from a clone of gawk.git, and the gawk.git revision from which
>> > they were copied should be recorded in git.git's commit adding them.
>>
>> Wow, I didn't even notice that was how the "original" came about.
>> No question that we should be taking from a known-stable snapshot,
>> not from a moving target.
>
> Gawk's regex has been fairly stable of late. But marking the revision
> from which you take the regex is a good idea in any case.
I do not mind taking a snapshot from an untagged commit (instead of
sticking to the last tagged commit, being suspicious about newer
developments). What I was reacting to was a loop like this:
for f in $(find . -name '*.[ch]' -printf "%f\n")
do wget http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gawk.git/plain/support/$f -O $f
done
i.e. allowing wget to grab paths out of possibly different commits.
Thanks.
