Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-10 Thread Sebastian Schuberth
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com 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

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-10 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 3:06 AM, Sebastian Schuberth sschube...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com 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.

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-10 Thread Junio C Hamano
Sebastian Schuberth sschube...@gmail.com 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

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-10 Thread Sebastian Schuberth
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com 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

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-09 Thread Junio C Hamano
Sebastian Schuberth sschube...@gmail.com 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

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-09 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Sebastian Schuberth sschube...@gmail.com 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

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-07 Thread Sebastian Schuberth
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Kyle J. McKay mack...@gmail.com 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

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-07 Thread Sebastian Schuberth
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com 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 sschube...@gmail.com --- H,

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-07 Thread Junio C Hamano
Sebastian Schuberth sschube...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com 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

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-07 Thread Sebastian Schuberth
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com 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 above

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-07 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com 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

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-07 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 11:30 PM, David Aguilar dav...@gmail.com wrote: On Sep 6, 2013 7:51 PM, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote: Junio C Hamano wrote: Sebastian Schuberth sschube...@gmail.com writes: For custom builds of Git it sometimes is inconvenient to annotate

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-06 Thread Junio C Hamano
Sebastian Schuberth sschube...@gmail.com 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 sschube...@gmail.com --- H, personally I'd actually want

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-06 Thread Kyle J. McKay
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

Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

2013-09-06 Thread Felipe Contreras
Junio C Hamano wrote: Sebastian Schuberth sschube...@gmail.com 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 sschube...@gmail.com --- H,