[Top][All Lists]

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

[bug#56989] [PATCH v3] gnu: Add dbqn.

From: Maxime Devos
Subject: [bug#56989] [PATCH v3] gnu: Add dbqn.
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2022 10:58:51 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.12.0

On 08-08-2022 15:54, Christopher Rodriguez wrote:
+         (commit "fd17b144483549dbd2bcf23e3a37a09219171a99")
+         (hash "1rr4l7ijzcg25n2igi1mzya6qllh5wsrf3m5i429rlgwv1fwvfji")
+         (version (git-version tag revision commit)))
I'm not seeing a '0' tag anywhere in the repository -- I dont see any tags at
all tere.
There are none; I thought the absence of any tage necessitates a '0' for
the version number, and wanted to keep the definitions
standardized. Should I inline the 0 instead in the git-version?

Yes, if upstream doesn't do versioning we use "0" or sometimes "0.0", in combination with git-version (or hg-version, ...). However, "0" is not a tag, so the variable 'tag' needs to be renamed or inlined.  As it is only used in a signle place, I would recommend inlining it. Likewise for 'version'.

Additionally, 'hash' needs to be inlined -- not only because it is used in a single place, but also because there is some compile-time error checking for hashes that only can work when it is inlined.

Also, I've seen a v2 for the first patch, but what happened to 2/5, 3/5, 4/5 and 5/5?


Attachment: OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

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