This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
RE: Branches in CVS repository?
- From: "Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>
- To: "'Nick Clifton'" <nickc at redhat dot com>,"'Mark Mitchell'" <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: "'DJ Delorie'" <dj at redhat dot com>,<binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:20:53 -0000
- Subject: RE: Branches in CVS repository?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: binutils-owner On Behalf Of Nick Clifton
> Sent: 19 January 2005 16:11
> Hi Mark,
>
> >> We could, if you can convince me that it is unneeded. At
> the moment I
> >> still think that it is useful.
>
> > But if it's not useful to someone else, and they're already
> operating in
> > a separate tag namespace, why is it important to you?
>
> Presumably you mean "a separate tag namespace when creating
> branches for other projects" ?
I think he's suggesting that the -<org>- part of the tag would suffice to
distinguish the namespaces even within the same <module>-, and the
least-significant word(s) of the tag that follows -<org>- could conform to any
format that those within -<org>- decided suited their needs without any danger
of clashing between -<org1>-'s namespace and -<org2>-'s.
<module>-<org>-<org-dependent-part>
No reason why <org-dependent-part> shouldn't amount to -<date> for -<org>- ==
-rh- and to -<somethingelse> when -<org>- == -cs-
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....