From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11E311397EC for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 17:50:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C2D8714278; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 17:49:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D42A214250 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 17:49:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2a02:908:b30:55a0:96de:80ff:fe6b:ddcc] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:908:b30:55a0:96de:80ff:fe6b:ddcc]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hasufell) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0183934096F for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 17:49:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] repoman adding "Package-Manager: portage-2.2.20.1" to every single commit To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <55D4AFCC.5080006@gentoo.org> <55D4BEE2.6030605@gentoo.org> From: hasufell X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1010 Message-ID: <55D4C1AC.1010209@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 19:49:32 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <55D4BEE2.6030605@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 95273b6b-1f9f-4c82-8591-951ca643689c X-Archives-Hash: 9212e9b78a4df60b506dccd340fcee21 On 08/19/2015 07:37 PM, Zac Medico wrote: > On 08/19/2015 09:33 AM, hasufell wrote: >> I don't want to start a lot of bikeshed, but I think this information is >> practically useless. >> >> If there has been a problem with a commit, ask the developer about his >> repoman version (which I believe was the reason for this, unless you >> want me to add "Package-Manager: paludis-2.4.0" to every commit ;). >> >> Let's just remove it. >> > > The intent is to leave a record of the version of repoman used, which > leaves an audit trail in case there's a bug in some some version (or to > detect if someone is using an ancient version). It can especially be > useful when new repoman checks need to be added for new EAPI features. > Why is it called "Package-Manager:" then? And how often was that useful in practice?