On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 02:17:59AM +0200, Kacper Kornet wrote:
> > > But that would be not 'totally unordered'.
> > > GIT history is just not linear
> > It's the different history: take %changelog as NEWS
> > and commit messages as CHANGELOG. The latter is for
> > developers while the former is fo
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 01:54:40AM +0300, Michael Shigorin wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 12:02:58AM +0200, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
> > But that would be not 'totally unordered'.
> > GIT history is just not linear
> It's the different history: take %changelog as NEWS
> and commit messages as CHAN
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 03:47:41PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> On Jul 16, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Kacper Kornet wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 06:38:10PM +0200, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 03:16:02PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> >>> On Jul 12, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Kacpe
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 12:02:58AM +0200, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
> But that would be not 'totally unordered'.
> GIT history is just not linear
It's the different history: take %changelog as NEWS
and commit messages as CHANGELOG. The latter is for
developers while the former is for users (sysadmin
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 03:47:41PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> b) will introduce some incompatibilities: for starters,
> there's functionality already implemented to truncate
> change log's by number/oldest that will break if you
> just go unordered.
But that would be not 'totally unordered'.
On Jul 16, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Kacper Kornet wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 06:38:10PM +0200, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 03:16:02PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>>> On Jul 12, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Kacper Kornet wrote:
>
>
> That can be because 'git rev-list', used to
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 06:38:10PM +0200, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 03:16:02PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> > On Jul 12, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Kacper Kornet wrote:
> > >> That can be because 'git rev-list', used to generate the changelog,
> > >> returns the commits ordered
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:41:55PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> (aside)
> The ordering constraint was likely a quick hack to detect
> time issues on an alpha miata (knowing almost all of RPM's hysteria).
Well it does help detect some mismerges...
--
WBR, Michael Shigorin
-- Linux
On Jul 16, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 03:16:02PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>> On Jul 12, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Kacper Kornet wrote:
>>
>>>
That can be because 'git rev-list', used to generate the changelog,
returns the commits ordered by comm
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 03:16:02PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> On Jul 12, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Kacper Kornet wrote:
>
> >
> >> That can be because 'git rev-list', used to generate the changelog,
> >> returns the commits ordered by commit date and not the AuthorDate
> >
>
> Doing qsort(3) on R
On Jul 12, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Kacper Kornet wrote:
>
>> That can be because 'git rev-list', used to generate the changelog,
>> returns the commits ordered by commit date and not the AuthorDate
>
Doing qsort(3) on RPMTAG_CHANGELOG* in rpmbuild isn't too hard, might be
easier than trying to figu
anch DEVEL LIBCHAMPLAIN_0_8
> > NEW_PEAR_REQUIRES PATCH_MD5 PLD RA-branch master niceprint rpm-4_1-15_1
> > rpm-4_4_3 rpm-4_4_6 rpm-4_4_7 rpm_files/master tag_checking
> > Building target platforms: i686-linux
> > error: %changelog not in descending chronological order
> > Error: pa
On 12.07.2012 11:49, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
I have examined the generated changelog in the temporary spec file and indeed:
i noticed this too for package where i cherry-picked commits and pushed
in one go (php package)
also likely happens with branch merges (like draenog change there)
--
glen
> rpm-4_4_3 rpm-4_4_6 rpm-4_4_7 rpm_files/master tag_checking
> Building target platforms: i686-linux
> error: %changelog not in descending chronological order
> Error: package build failed. (no more info)
I have examined the generated changelog in the temporary spec file and indeed:
>
14 matches
Mail list logo