From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j3P1iccR001776 for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 01:44:38 GMT Received: from tirpitz.iat.sfu.ca ([209.87.56.17]) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DPseN-0006f6-KS for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 01:44:39 +0000 Received: (qmail 3501 invoked from network); 24 Apr 2005 18:44:37 -0700 Received: from s01060050da688d47.vc.shawcable.net (HELO curie.orbis-terrarum.net) (24.80.100.253) by tirpitz.iat.sfu.ca with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 24 Apr 2005 18:44:37 -0700 Received: (qmail 2727 invoked by uid 10000); 24 Apr 2005 18:44:37 -0700 Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:44:37 -0700 From: "Robin H. Johnson" To: Gentoo Developers Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Committing straight to stable Message-ID: <20050425014437.GA1461@curie-int.orbis-terrarum.net> Mail-Followup-To: Gentoo Developers References: <20050424144444.58715f9c@snowdrop> <1114391088.20022.12.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1114391088.20022.12.camel@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Archives-Salt: feb7d215-c43a-4d5e-909a-1b00b975929c X-Archives-Hash: 5bbd2f02d88454a2ba6e2ed35e4a0184 --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 03:04:48AM +0200, Anders Rune Jensen wrote: > Let me first start by saying that committing straight to stable was > clearly a mistake. I can't help wonder why CVS would change patch files > (it probably doesn't know the difference between ordinary files and > patches)=20 This is mostly an assumption here, as I don't know all of the details, but in the past I did run into problems with patches that dealt with the CVS keywords. You'd commit the patch, but doing so would change it, until you commited it with the -kb keyword option. > or why repoman doesn't catch something like this? CVS changing > files on commit goes against the whole "test before commit" mantra and > I'm probably not the first to have encountered this problem? You aren't the first no, but the solutions to it are limited: - teach developers to use -kb where they should - use an alternative keyword only for the gentoo-x86 module (some of the BSDs do this IIRC) - and turn off the normal keywords. - repoman checks might be very difficult to do, but it should be possible to at least have it do warnings if it finds CVS keywords that might be dangerous. --=20 Robin Hugh Johnson E-Mail : robbat2@orbis-terrarum.net Home Page : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=3Dpeople.robbat2 ICQ# : 30269588 or 41961639 GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Robbat2 @ Orbis-Terrarum Networks iD8DBQFCbEuFPpIsIjIzwiwRAgIsAKCLAuH1Nx0wH4rBah0WFpdtS/9T5ACg7eFK KHH5ZW6oKxr0twz9HAXCTnI= =lLGo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list