Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 15:56:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 15:55:31 -0500 Received: from crack.them.org ([65.125.64.184]:24218 "EHLO crack.them.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 15:54:38 -0500 Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 16:05:13 -0500 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Larry McVoy , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] BK->CVS (real time mirror) Message-ID: <20030312210513.GA6948@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Larry McVoy , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20030312174244.GC13792@work.bitmover.com> <20030312195120.GB7275@work.bitmover.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030312195120.GB7275@work.bitmover.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2590 Lines: 57 On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 11:51:20AM -0800, Larry McVoy wrote: > Well, I agree that they should be able to get at the information in a > neutral way. I guess it was unrealistic, but I was expecting that people > would go download the CVS tree and poke around and see if it is what they > wanted. We could have had a nice technical discussion about what was > missing, if anything. If the discussion had happened, they would have > found out that even for the missing deltas we captured the information. > > Here's an example. Suppose the graph is like > > 1.1 (torvalds) -> 1.2 (alan) -> 1.3 (sct) -> 1.4 (torvalds) > \ / > \-> 1.1.1.1 (davej) --------/ > > and we picked the straight 1.1 to 1.4 path. When we created the CVS 1.4 > delta, we knew that it was a merge delta and we needed to capture the > data off on the branch. We already capture the contents, the missing part > is what davej may have typed in as comments. We capture that as well, it > looks like this: > > revision 1.342 > date: 2003/03/07 15:39:16; author: torvalds; state: Exp; lines: +7 -1 > [PATCH] kbuild: Smart notation for non-verbose output > > 2003/03/05 19:50:27-06:00 kai > kbuild: Make build stop on vmlinux link error > > (Logical change 1.8166) > > That particular example is from the top level Makefile, Linus merged > in Kai's work and we added the "kbuild: Make build stop on vmlinux link > error" comments from the merged in delta. If there were more than one > delta, they get merged as well, so the rlog output is completely accurate. Larry, this brings up something I was meaning to ask you before this thread exploded. What happens to those "logical change" numbers over time? My understanding (since you mentioned ~ 3 minute latency on BK pushes, not five hour latency) was that future changes would go into CVS incrementally. As far as I understand the "revision numbers" that BK uses, they're subject to change. Based on what trees Linus merges from, a revision number in his repository may not always have the same number. So the comments will become out-of-date and inaccurate. Or am I wrong about the potential for change within a single repository? -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/