On 11/07/2017 03:25 PM, James Feeney wrote: > On 11/06/2017 11:44 PM, Matthias Schiffer wrote: >> r# is the number of commits since the "reboot" tag. If your local branch >> (e.g. "master") has a upstream branch (e.g. "origin/master"), it will use >> number and commit ID of the last common commit of both branches, and add >> the number of local commits with a + (e.g. "r4601+95-1ab227d688" - the last >> common commit is 1ab227d688, 4601 after "reboot", and there are 95 local >> commits that aren't upstream). > > Thanks Matthias, that helps a lot. I also found some help with making sense > of the git lingo, for anyone that has not already played with this: > > Visualizing Git Concepts with D3 > https://onlywei.github.io/explain-git-with-d3/ > > It's an interactive visual learning aid. > >> Basically, we tried to mimic the "revision >> ID" SVN provided for the old OpenWrt trunk, adding some extra information >> provided by git. > > Ha! So there *was* an element of the OpenWrt revision numbering! > > I'm tempted to ask if there is not some value, then, in a LEDE revision > numbering that would look like "lede-17.01.r4601"? Would that not be a > precise, and monotonic, version declaration, no matter whether it was an > "official" release, or a nightly, or even some random snapshot? > > Hmm - and then, isn't a designation of the form "lede r5217" completely > unambiguous, other than not providing a branch name, to say, for instance, > that it is, or is not, an "official release"? > > So then, LEDE does not run parallel development branches in the main git > repository, and simply designates certain development snapshots as "official > releases"?
No, we have two official branches: master (active development for the next major release), and lede-17.01 (forked from master shortly before the 17.01 release; only bugfixes and other "small" changes are backported from master; base for 17.01.x maintenance releases). Fixing our revision numbering to include the branch name to make this more or less unambiguous is the intent of the two patches I linked. The commit ID should still be included in this revision number (e.g. lede-17.01-r9000-abcdef), as developers could still set the "upstream branch" to an inofficial branch without changing the branch name, thus making the number ambiguous again. Matthias
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
