On 10/30/2013 01:01 PM, Chad Versace wrote: > For the sake of git-describe, I propose we tag the 10.0 fork > point on master as 'mesa-10.0-fork', 'mesa-10.0-base', or > something similair. How do people feel about that?
I support this idea. To avoid confusion with tags on the branch, I think the tag should reflect where master is going. mesa-10.next? mesa-10.1-devel? I'm open to suggestions. I'll update the version with the first patch after the tag. > It's been a long time since git-describe has given useful > info. It's reported snb-magic for a looooooooong time. > > $ git-describe > snb-magic-18845-g103824d _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
