[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Serial lines for Automake

From: Francesco Salvestrini
Subject: Re: Serial lines for Automake
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 12:40:14 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.9.10

Hi Filippo,

On Saturday 18 July 2009, Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 07:36:04PM +0200, Francesco Salvestrini wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > On Saturday 18 July 2009, Peter Simons wrote:
> > > Hi Francesco,
> > >
> > >  > [commit hook validation]
> > >
> > > thank you for the explanation. This sounds to me like the #serial lines
> > > would be added to the m4 files in the Git repository, but we'd use Git
> > > to guarantee that the serial numbers are bumped every time a macro is
> > > committed to. Is that right?
> >
> > Yes, but I'm going to takeback that approach. It couldn't work easily in
> > our current model.
> >
> > We must ensure that the distribution serial numbers are the same,
> > regardless of the repository used for building the distribution.
> what about going with the git hooks but the other way round:
> If the macro expansion has changed (modulo comments) then the commit must
> also increment the serial number?
> This hook obviously has to be effective only on the authoritative repo
> (i.e. the one on savannah)

Yes, in our current development model (plain), where every maintainer commits 
directly on Savannah, that should be the only approach. In that case the only 
place for the hook(s) is the server, as you wrote.

The drawbacks:

1) a release requires a fresh clone
2) we must ask the savannah-hackers to install the hook(s) 
3) what Dustin states in its reply

After all:

time for i in `find ./ -name "*.m4"` ; do git log $i | egrep -c "^commit 
[0-9af]+" ; done

real    0m23.127s
user    0m19.680s
sys     0m2.150s

git-log+grep has drawbacks 1 and 3 too.

Best regards,

Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.  Inside of a dog, it is too
dark to read.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]