Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Usages of CVS $Header$ keyword in ebuilds - use cases wanted
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:24:38
Message-Id: 20080827192434.GL27338@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Usages of CVS $Header$ keyword in ebuilds - use cases wanted by "Robin H. Johnson"
1 On 27-08-2008 12:15:35 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
2 > For those not using SSH ControlMaster, one of the side-effects of having
3 > to do two separate commits is the SSH setup latency hitting twice.
4 >
5 > I wouldn't call it repoman's fault like Fabian did, but the
6
7 Right. I thought I suggested that "it" (the double-commit) is a mess
8 for repoman. Not that it is repoman's fault.
9
10 > double-commit is why I called it a mess. If we drop the $Header$ in any
11 > file covered by a developer-generated Manifest, it becomes a single
12 > commit with contents+Manifest :-).
13
14 It seems that what you call "mess" means needing a double commit for a
15 single "repoman commit". That to me isn't a mess, but a performance
16 issue, and as I indicated a possible point of corruption. But we've
17 dealt long enough with the situation without problems to ignore that
18 point.
19
20 But to repeat:
21 - no I'm not against removing the $Header: $ stuff
22 - yes I'd even like to use another VCS which can make my life easer
23 - but, as long as we're on CVS, I'd prefer it when you'd keep my life
24 sort of bearable
25 - so, keep the $Header: $ stuff for Prefix' sake (me) as long as
26 we're using CVS
27
28
29 --
30 Fabian Groffen
31 Gentoo on a different level