[lkml]   [2017]   [Sep]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4.9 00/14] 4.9.50-stable review
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 08:22:13AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 10:05:00AM -0500, Tom Gall wrote:

> > Does it make sense to create tags for the RC(s) so git describe gets
> > it right? Given the right version is in the Makefile kinda feels like
> > that'd be a belt and suspenders approach.

> Depends. A tag only makes sense if the branch isn't rebased, otherwise
> (if the tag can change) it would be misleading (as would be to report
> the version number from Makefile).

Rebasing shouldn't be an issue for tags (they're not branches), and
changes would a disaster no matter what.

> Given that, I think reporting the SHA is better, since it reports clearly
> which version was tested.

This definitely makes sense though (especially in a generalized tool),
defensively if nothing else. I think you ideally want both.
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-09-13 19:07    [W:0.068 / U:11.080 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site