[Libreoffice] Git tags: why not "3.3.4-rc2" instead of ""

Norbert Thiebaud nthiebaud at gmail.com
Thu Aug 18 21:44:16 PDT 2011

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen
<bjoern.michaelsen at canonical.com> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 20:40:13 +0100
> Michael Meeks <michael.meeks at novell.com>
> wrote:
>>       It looks like yet-another bikeshed to me :-)
> Indeed.
>> I'd be more concerned that git tag -l on the 'core' repo has dozens
>> of tags for the same version: artwork_libreoffice-
>> base_libreoffice- etc. personally ;-) suggestions for cleaning
>> that up much appreciated.
> While you are clearly hijacking this thread ;) the solution should be
> rather simply: merge all the repo-tags for each tag and tag that joined
> commit. After creating those tags, all the separate tags could be
> removed for readability proposes.

by doing that you would be creating new commits completely out of
order of the history... essentially creating a cactus on top of n old
repos history with a bunch of leaf-tags. (that is dead-end 18 commit
branch just to merge them all -- since at least .gitignore conflict,
that make octopus merge problematic -- with the tag at the end of
it... without any connection to the tag before or after it)

All in all, a lot of work that will just add lots of ugliness to the
already hairy history for... not having so many tags ? these tag are
very easy to grep out of existences... right no there are no 'useful'
tag on core, but when there is,  git tag | grep libreoffice  will give
you the interesting ones.

The benefit of these tags (in core) is not so much to be able the
check out what _was_ version 3.3.2 for instance... but to have some
markers when browsing the history of a given module... and locate the
branch point to the 3.3, 3.4 etc branches for each old repos...


More information about the LibreOffice mailing list