On 2015-10-12 16:11, Roman Yeryomin wrote: > On 12 October 2015 at 16:34, Felix Fietkau <n...@openwrt.org> wrote: >> On 2015-10-12 15:09, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: >>> Right now, the revision number (r<something>) is really useful to figure >>> out what particular openwrt version is being used, when people report >>> bugs. The commit hash cannot be used as a replacement, since it might be >>> one that isn't present in the official repo. >>> When using tags as a starting point (via git describe), somebody has to >>> create those tags, which is cumbersome (and would mean adding lots of >>> useless ones). >>> >>> The tags would be the major versions and RCs. I don't believe other tags >>> should be used. >>> >>> Apart from that, I understand that if someone cloned the SVN repo (full >>> svn history), created it's own server, and developed on top of a given >>> revision X, the same problem would arise. >> I haven't seen a single instance of somebody doing this, and in my >> opinion it would be kind of stupid anyway :) >> We don't even advertise the SVN server URL to users anymore for a reason. >> > > IMO git describe --dirty would work perfectly. You would see a short > hash and if user modified it or not. If the user made a local commit, the short hash becomes useless.
> For users it would work even better than svn revision. > For devs or users who do commit locally both svn and git "revisions" > can be "spoofed" anyway so it just useless. It's not about whether they can be spoofed or not. Users typically don't spoof revisions because that would be a stupid and far fetched thing to do when reporting a bug. - Felix _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel