[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] c--b--v/base-0

From: Tom Lord
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] c--b--v/base-0
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:25:11 -0700 (PDT)

    > From: Zenaan Harkness <address@hidden>

    > When would one see a base-n patch, other than base-0 ?

That would be "never".

(In ascii, "base" sorts lower than "patch" which sorts lower than
"version" which sorts lower than "versionfix".  And who needs more
than 4, anyway?!?!?!  The thing I screwed up: you can't infer the
namespace ancestor of a "version-0" revsion from just the name.  Quite
possibly, the whole --seal noise will have to slowly fade away.  But
..... not entirely.   It has utility and some people are using it.
It's tricky to get right.   An arbitrary decision that has to get
imposed..... I got it *slightly* wrong in my opinion .... and whatever
the ultimate decision turns out to be, people will always have mild
complaints about it (hopefully with such complaints distributed evenly
across many users))


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]