On 21/10/14 15:01, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:14:43 +0200
> Marc Sune wrote:
>
>> On 21/10/14 10:46, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> My balance is different because I have a simpler solution for Marc's
>>> problem:
>>> git fetch && git merge $(git tag | grep -v -- -rc |
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 00:00:58 -0700
Matthew Hall wrote:
> What I think git in general and DPDK in particular are missing is, they have
> a
> tradition tags for releases, however I think this is broken because you can't
> easily append more stuff to tages.
In git tags and branches are almost
I am aware of that. But it's a pain to do it. And then your local branch
doesn't move forward when new stable releases come out. So I was suggesting we
have a stable branch always available and known-good pointing to latest 1.X.X
or 2.X.X release of latest stable 1.X or 2.X. It would also be
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 11:28:47AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> But I care about the message brought by such change. It would mean that
> we can break the development branch and that most of developers don't test
> it nor base their patches on the latest commit. It's all about simple rules
>
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:14:43 +0200
Marc Sune wrote:
> On 21/10/14 10:46, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > My balance is different because I have a simpler solution for Marc's
> > problem:
> > git fetch && git merge $(git tag | grep -v -- -rc | tail -n1)
> Thomas,
>
> We all know we _can_ do
Thomas,
On 21/10/14 11:28, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2014-10-21 11:14, Marc Sune:
>> On 21/10/14 10:46, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> My balance is different because I have a simpler solution for Marc's
>>> problem:
>>> git fetch && git merge $(git tag | grep -v -- -rc | tail -n1)
>> We all know
2014-10-21 11:14, Marc Sune:
> On 21/10/14 10:46, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > My balance is different because I have a simpler solution for Marc's
> > problem:
> > git fetch && git merge $(git tag | grep -v -- -rc | tail -n1)
>
> We all know we _can_ do this. But is it really necessary? We
On 21/10/14 10:46, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> My balance is different because I have a simpler solution for Marc's problem:
> git fetch && git merge $(git tag | grep -v -- -rc | tail -n1)
Thomas,
We all know we _can_ do this. But is it really necessary? We should be
all as lazy as possible
2014-10-21 08:36, Richardson, Bruce:
> From: Marc Sune
> > Some DPDK users, including myself, use a clone of the git repository to
> > compile DPDK for their applications, instead of downloading the tarball
> > of each release.
> >
> > In my opinion, it would be useful for such users that the
Good morning,
Some DPDK users, including myself, use a clone of the git repository to
compile DPDK for their applications, instead of downloading the tarball
of each release.
In my opinion, it would be useful for such users that the master branch
contains only stable releases, to prevent
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 11:38:34AM +0200, Marc Sune wrote:
> Thomas,
>
> On 21/10/14 11:28, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >2014-10-21 11:14, Marc Sune:
> >>On 21/10/14 10:46, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >>>My balance is different because I have a simpler solution for Marc's
> >>>problem:
> >>> git
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Marc Sune
> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 9:23 AM
> To:
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] development/integration branch?
>
> Good morning,
>
> Some DPDK users, including myself, use a
12 matches
Mail list logo
