From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 10 16:36:24 2022 Received: (at 53163) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jan 2022 21:36:24 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53423 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n72L2-0002Hs-7S for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 16:36:24 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com ([209.85.221.66]:42998) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n72L0-0002Hd-4t for 53163@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 16:36:22 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id k30so11722114wrd.9 for <53163@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 13:36:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:subject:from:to:date:in-reply-to:references:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DZZbe4w6knvh8k5X5Zu4siXrLQ3T7BMkJu9W1OqGWQc=; b=csnwCHPm6Rgsvo2nLcTjE/9vsAaGbFXizpFqjcHbibWT33PM1ARJAQPTjbp+zo4dZo uiz2+ZN2oXCicxr7L99hpHrs5VMJAdysSbI4QEWQaPbnLbZDc9IE/d3ahYMSekeBUYeX JAqJQNMvO7nFo9UHlfemtuAd1VVIdV02O9C4C6VMrxAQ82PtLAs/dkoe0aMuDQR4ljK5 hQsQ/OnvR/xpCwcRRZFGmO3EdAilUhBCC27itWhD+m8wITkWNR8GGddgg8m3hzu9tAOI +MebWsB8uLAMtEmSsq5g5vZ6QDza9LkBk4JXNDLgwcEIyBYQ7OXYWG9+KRxYD1mMTLSM aXmg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DZZbe4w6knvh8k5X5Zu4siXrLQ3T7BMkJu9W1OqGWQc=; b=qJS9RJCSYls6pp6Jn0i1ujFdFaMM2qM1F86tDdst99ROJYRHiZNA0xnUqW9/G9vdHZ hAl8KlsktpBRCMbX+P3Vw56y/cd1w8bGyjdpf+Hss91R7ToAy+aLXFZf7ZcXPprdgPLl EleDVrOFxokWB5rmoWcL3wYWGLUfGDfXKwthwPWpZNVkqeZc7QKDHPf2MLKLY34w8Zba FIc9F943aPhWfSMf54nsNn8+LKtMYrB08WipEy+8hTXsC7IMq6ZRWZpbri3zDo6ii91r IHjcpop2TPFxfey+qZ4+gcEh0kzRil6Ie6FE2irogaHNwJm1HSxLk9KZnCMmsCiB238+ D10g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532cgLaOKvAEEWy+fRFOW1Am2QLcikXYR0EXqW4lZiQdrJYiErOD sNAhg3QjVQOb6Al1Xv7ztLU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwfqG2gm7paKSunMW+TXAxJR02uuQkczZ6AE9JV1m7IqFrzbALpR51gPVbmj2W2MicmXqNOYw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:f74f:: with SMTP id z15mr1241904wrp.264.1641850576255; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 13:36:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from nijino.fritz.box (85-127-52-93.dsl.dynamic.surfer.at. [85.127.52.93]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l25sm39221wmh.18.2022.01.10.13.36.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 10 Jan 2022 13:36:15 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <855630e60e664bb9ad57f1e07479e393b4f8fa06.camel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [bug#53163] [PATCH] doc: Document some reasons for/against git tags/commits. From: Liliana Marie Prikler To: Maxime Devos , 53163@debbugs.gnu.org Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 22:36:14 +0100 In-Reply-To: <61f01b2b439db750424023bb2555865ff8139255.camel@telenet.be> References: <5623ec2b15bf60a51587b0592ad178b2bec3ef37.camel@telenet.be> <3aeda438471930ca3b958a35681a8191cc51fe92.camel@gmail.com> <61f01b2b439db750424023bb2555865ff8139255.camel@telenet.be> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 53163 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, Am Montag, dem 10.01.2022 um 22:08 +0100 schrieb Maxime Devos: > A v2 patch with the suggestions applied is attached. LGTM, but let's wait for more opinions. Since this does concern Guix as a whole I don't want to be the sole dictator here. > > >   In the particular case of minetest, we > > have an external map of "tags" to commits that can be queried, but > > for > > most repos I fear the tags would simply be lost to time. > > Here "tags" = releases on content.minetest.net, and not Git tags? Yep, "tags" = contentdb releases, I forgot the terminology here :) > > > > That's a general question that has not reached a conclusion yet.  > > IIRC the goal was to make tags more robust by replacing them with > > git-describe like tags.  This would also make it easier to port > > between revisioned commit and tagged one, since one would have to > > let-bind commit either way. > > FWIW, the git updater in (guix upstream) might need to be modified to > support the "git describe" style in commit fields, and a linter > to verify that the tag+number corresponds to the commit (to > avoid some ‘tricking peer review’ issues), but otherwise this > seems rather nice to me.  I didn't investigate closely though. Yeah, in my opinion we'd also want a (git-tag VERSION COMMIT) procedure to produce it, which is definitely c-u material. And obviously long hashes would be required. Cheers