On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:28 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> Our own version generation in GIT-VERSION-GEN is somewhat sane by testing
>> if we have a .git dir, and use that as a signal whether the obtained
>> copy of git was obtained using git (clone/fetch) or if it is ju
Junio C Hamano writes:
> I do not have a strong preference for or against the "treat a broken
> repository as if nothing is wrong with the revision, but just mark
> it as dirty" idea. I would be more receptive if it substituted the
> "-dirty" marker with something else, e.g. "-broken", though.
>
Stefan Beller writes:
> Our own version generation in GIT-VERSION-GEN is somewhat sane by testing
> if we have a .git dir, and use that as a signal whether the obtained
> copy of git was obtained using git (clone/fetch) or if it is just a
> downloaded tar ball.
>
> Other scripts to generate a ver
Our own version generation in GIT-VERSION-GEN is somewhat sane by testing
if we have a .git dir, and use that as a signal whether the obtained
copy of git was obtained using git (clone/fetch) or if it is just a
downloaded tar ball.
Other scripts to generate a version are not as cautious and just r
4 matches
Mail list logo
