On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Ian Romanick <i...@freedesktop.org> wrote: > On 09/29/2014 10:01 AM, Matt Turner wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> While I've been through the RELEASES document I believe it would be >>> beneficial if we regularly create a tag("release"), that is to serve the >>> following >>> - Human understandable format >>> I.e. version 1.0.2 comes after 1.0.1, oh there is even date in there. >> >> See next point. >> >>> - Something everyone can parse, unlike b33979a8f5c852fbffc072b0. >>> When you don't have the tree at hand or don't know what git is. >> >> If either of these is the case, you have no business with piglit. >> >>> - Ease distributions interested in packaging piglit. >> >> I don't see value in distributions packaging piglit. >> >>> - Something for our QA and other non-developer teams to cling onto. >> >> I think this has actually back fired for us when we tried. Ian >> probably remembers more. > > I agree with Matt. The one thing that seems useful is having a tag to > mark the point in the piglit tree where a particular Mesa release was > tested. The main I didn't do that on previous Mesa releases is that I > tested with my current work tree... which had a bunch of tests that > weren't upstream. That would have made the tag be on a SHA1 that didn't > exist.
Emil's email did say: "period: 3 months(roughly aligned with mesa releases)" So, if he added a message to the tag indicating it was used to test Mesa 10.4, would that seem acceptable? -Jordan _______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit