Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch and linux 2.7

[Pau Aliagas]

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Robert Collins wrote:

> On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 07:41, Tom Lord wrote:
> 
> > Let's split some (relatively thick, actually) hairs.
> > 
> > A "master repository" that provides a reference for ids: good thing,
> > probably (though, now that you raise it..... at least an assumption to
> > question a bit).
> 
> Lets do so then...
> Currently, there are two non-source intrusive id generation schemes:
> .id files.
> names.
> 
> the names id style doesn't support source tree reorganisation.
> the content of .id files is currently randomly generated.
> 
> Assuming that most folk will go with tagline (for future flexability)
> and tla add the files - we'll end up with separate id's for the same
> file in different repositories. And changing an id == a delete + add.
> 
> So - questions?

2 things:

-we have address@hidden at http://arch.debian.org/arch/linux
 that has release/pre-release granularity.
 This is good enough for past kernels but not good enough for future 
 developement. Maybe with the same effort we can import the kernel at the 
 maximum granularity, helping in future back and forth porting fetures 
 from 2.4 to 2.6.
 If we decide not to include the maximum granularity (importing split 
 patches or the bkcvs tree, as it does not look too difficult and could 
 be a very good test for the import tools and arch itself) we will always 
 miss it for all the derived branches. It would be a pitty because it's 
 doable, maybe not easyly, but worth it.

-naming conventions.
 I would go for explicit naming as no tags will be included for the sake 
 of it. No need to waste our efforts here as much as I like the taglines :)

> > A "master repository" that tries to encode all previous (or even
> > ongoing) history at some arbitrarily fine level of granularity:  uh,
> > sounds like make-work to me.
> 
> Agreed.

As the tune says: it's now or never...

Pau