On 13/03/12 21:23, Dan McGee wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Florian Pritz <bluew...@xinu.at> wrote: >> On 13.03.2012 12:05, Allan McRae wrote: >>> I do understand the branch name is useless once you have a tag/commit >>> id. That is why later in the email I said it only really serves as >>> documentation. >> >> Use comments for that. > > So just how do you propose using a comment to describe origin/maint in > the pacman repository to build my pacman-maint-git package? I don't > follow this logic one bit...you clearly need to use a branch name, not > some arbitrary sha1 that never moves forward with new commits...
I think context is needed here... I said the branch name is only really useful as documentation _if_ we are building for a specified commit. The three cases I see as needing covered are: 1) build from master HEAD 2) build from a branch HEAD 3) build from a given commit/tag What we need to find is the simplest way of allowing these (and other reasonable suggestion that arises...). Allan
