sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Discussion of Spells and Grimoire items
List archive
[SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 13731 for review
- From: Geoffrey Derber <Geoffrey.Derber AT Trinity.edu>
- To: "Sergey A. Lipnevich" <sergey AT optimaltec.com>
- Cc: sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 13731 for review
- Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:33:56 -0500
Sergey A. Lipnevich wrote:
I agree with your argument but I don't agree with removing update. First, CVS tags can move. Second, update is actually a cool way of doinf things. I've just updated apr/apr-util/apr-iconv by changing the tag name and making them FORCE_DOWNLOAD=on (and fixing the sorcery in the process). Alternatively, we could do some post-update processing to wring CVS/Entries into format whihc is a)correct b) good for us to checksum. For example, assuming CVS update brings timestamps to "the time of last change to this file", we could replace dates in CVS/Entries with the dates on the respective files. That would bring two checked out copies of CVS sources in full sync on two PCs. Would it?Usually they don't move, they can, but almost never do. I guess it also depends on the way you write the spell as to wether the update would continue to work on different tags. Currently for spells I write, it's generally <spell>-<tag>.tar.bz2 so if the tag changes, the source tarball changes too. I'd actually prefer to keep it that way, but I could change it. But this way it's easier to tell which tag that particular source tarball is. The update ability is already lost there. On the main branches it isn't because those are all named <spell>-cvs.tar.bz2 On the main branch update is good, I just see it as almost little use on tagged versions.
BTW, I'm mirroring this into SM-Grimoire just in case somebody wants to join in.
Thanks!
Sergey.
In the end though, what I'd really like to be able to do is have checksum ability on the tagged versions. It just seemed easiest to me to use the 'cvs --export' for the non branch tags. It's not a bad idea to try it through modifying the contents, but couldn't that break the update ability as well? I've never tried it.
Btw, http://bugs.sourcemage.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3265 also kind of deals with this issue.
Geoff
-
[SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 13731 for review,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 07/10/2003
-
Message not available
-
[SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 13731 for review,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 07/10/2003
-
[SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 13731 for review,
Geoffrey Derber, 07/10/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 13731 for review,
Geoffrey Derber, 07/10/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 13731 for review, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 07/10/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 13731 for review,
Geoffrey Derber, 07/10/2003
-
[SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 13731 for review,
Geoffrey Derber, 07/10/2003
-
[SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 13731 for review,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 07/10/2003
-
Message not available
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.