Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular

[Mirian Crzig Lennox]

address@hidden (Tom Lord) writes:
>
> What are the "<ver1>" and "<ver2>" strings that you want to optimize
> for?  Are these things like symbolic product release identifiers?

Right.  Someone wants to know "how did this file change between
2.1beta4 and 2.1beta5?", for example.

> When I need that functionality, I typically use arch tags.  I create a
> version (or versions) which will contain nothing but tag revisions and
> map release ids to and from the names of those.  [...]
>       tla--release--1.4--patch-5
> to tag a revision of the tla tree that corresponds to release
>       tla-1.4pre5
> but, of course, if your non-isomorphic release names are a constraint
> in your shop, you can't do quite that.

Actually, that isn't bad.  The important thing is that the version is
back to 2.1, which is what people expect, and that the "branch release
number" is syntactically distinct.  I don't think people would balk
too much at "product--beta-release--2.1--patch-5" to mean
"product-2.1beta5".  It also means that comands which accept a
version-spec in place of a revision-spec will still work (which they
wouldn't if we were to use a product--beta--2.1.5 notation instead.)

Thanks for the suggestion -- this helps quite a bit.

Mirian