Christian MICHON, 06.02.2009:
>
> On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:23 PM, Markus Heidelberg
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > What do you think about the commit message format, is it ok? I searched
> > for a git-like message, without losing information. The duplicated first
> > line of the problem description is unavoidable I think, because it
> > should be fully automated and the first line shouldn't merely contain
> > the patch number.
>
> you're facing the same problem I faced in July. I noticed (example
> 7.2.102) the commit message is truncated. so we're even here: I've the
> same issue and this requires somehow manual intervention. :(
James does manual intervention in his Debian repo, but for me it
absolutely has to run automated. These truncated sentences aren't nice,
but one can live with that.
> overall, I like the [7.2.102] header ;-)
Idea from the Debian repo :)
> > Normally you wouldn't even have to worry about the updates from the repo
> > later: if you pull, you will simply be already up to date, since the
> > commits you created have the same SHA1s than mine.
>
> no, this is wrong: if commits created from different people would be
> having the same SHA1s, we'd be in deep trouble. Please re-phrase, it's
> unclear.
No, it's correct indeed, if you use vim-update.sh from the stuff branch.
I shouldn't have added an empty line between the text you quoted and
the following from my previous mail, note the text "same script":
But if you think no, I'm too slow, that's too late,
you can use the same script I'm using and comfortably fetch and apply
the patches yourself. It's available in the stuff branch.
Author/committer name/email/date have the same values, regardless
whether you or I update the repo with the vim-update.sh script. The
patch is the same anyway, so the blobs and trees are equal. So the whole
content is equal and leads to the same commit id (SHA1). Test it!
> > OK, this should be
> > the desired case, but it's currently not true, the SHA1s can differ
> > dependent on the time zone. This will be fixed, I just don't know
> > exactly, how. Should I just assume UTC offset +0000, which is wrong? The
> > time zone information is not included in the patch file. My current time
> > zone is the same as Bram's :)
>
> I solved this issue by using info from the patch directly: version.c
> is always modified and is a good indication to when the patch was
> made.
No, you didn't get me. I use the date from src/version.c as well. But
this date doesn't contain an UTC offset and hence the offset of my
timezone is used for creating the commit.
> > A new branch is online: fix/fast-join
> > It contains the patches for the improved :join algorithm from Milan
> > Vancura. It is not yet included in the monster 'master' branch due to
> > lack of time. I have to pack for FOSDEM, have to get up at 4 AM.
> > Anybody else there?
>
> nope, won't be there: have fun!
Had fun.
Markus
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
