On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> string to that file before building, so in that sense, we do not
> *need* DEF_VER and version. But they have been there for a long
> time, and I do not think it gives us a good trade-off between
> risking regression and reducing the lineco
Sebastian Schuberth writes:
> Right, but do we really need DEF_VER *and* version? Couldn't we just
> package official source tarballs in a way that they already contain an
> auto-generated version file?
If you read our Makefile, you will see that we do include the
version file in our official ta
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 3:06 AM, Sebastian Schuberth
wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
a case where you have your own tag that points at the exact version
as I tagged? In such a case, do you have a preference on which tag
>>>
>>> No. I always carry patches
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Which raises another question on my side: Isn't it tedious for you to
>> both update DEF_VER *and* tag a version? Wouldn't it probably be less
>> error prove (in the sense of keeping DEF_VER and tagged version in
>> sync) to remove DEF_VER
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Sebastian Schuberth writes:
>
>> Which raises another question on my side: Isn't it tedious for you to
>> both update DEF_VER *and* tag a version? Wouldn't it probably be less
>> error prove (in the sense of keeping DEF_VER and tagged versi
Sebastian Schuberth writes:
> Which raises another question on my side: Isn't it tedious for you to
> both update DEF_VER *and* tag a version? Wouldn't it probably be less
> error prove (in the sense of keeping DEF_VER and tagged version in
> sync) to remove DEF_VER completely and just die if all
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 11:30 PM, David Aguilar wrote:
>
> On Sep 6, 2013 7:51 PM, "Felipe Contreras"
> wrote:
>>
>> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> > Sebastian Schuberth writes:
>> >
>> > > For custom builds of Git it sometimes is inconvenient to annotate tags
>> > > because there simply is nothing to
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I am not sure what you mean by automated, but if you can tell your
> automation infrastructure that the way to build this Git software is
> to run "make" in it, shouldn't it be trivial to instead tell it to
> run something like this instead
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> If you want to give build a custom name,
>>>
>>> echo buildname >version
>>>
>>> should be sufficient, no?
>>
>> That's not sufficient if you care about a proper (automated) release
>> workflow with your releases tagged.
>
> I take the
Sebastian Schuberth writes:
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>>> For custom builds of Git it sometimes is inconvenient to annotate tags
>>> because there simply is nothing to say, so do not require an annotation.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Schuberth
>>> ---
>>
>>
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> For custom builds of Git it sometimes is inconvenient to annotate tags
>> because there simply is nothing to say, so do not require an annotation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Schuberth
>> ---
>
> H, personally I'd actually want thi
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Kyle J. McKay wrote:
>> For custom builds of Git it sometimes is inconvenient to annotate tags
>> because there simply is nothing to say, so do not require an annotation.
>
> It's not that hard to add -m "" to the command line:
It's not hard to type those charact
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Sebastian Schuberth writes:
>
> > For custom builds of Git it sometimes is inconvenient to annotate tags
> > because there simply is nothing to say, so do not require an annotation.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Schuberth
> > ---
>
> H, personally I'd actually wan
On Sep 6, 2013, at 13:10, Sebastian Schuberth wrote:
For custom builds of Git it sometimes is inconvenient to annotate tags
because there simply is nothing to say, so do not require an
annotation.
It's not that hard to add -m "" to the command line:
git tag -a -m "" new-annotated-tag
if y
Sebastian Schuberth writes:
> For custom builds of Git it sometimes is inconvenient to annotate tags
> because there simply is nothing to say, so do not require an annotation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Schuberth
> ---
H, personally I'd actually want this to stay the way it is, or
even re
For custom builds of Git it sometimes is inconvenient to annotate tags
because there simply is nothing to say, so do not require an annotation.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Schuberth
---
GIT-VERSION-GEN | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/GIT-VERSION-GEN b/GIT-VERSION
16 matches
Mail list logo
