Dmitry Potapov <dpotapov <at> gmail.com> writes: > Yes, but then I do not see any reason to do any time consuming building > and testing in the working tree. I create a snapshot of the interesting > version using 'git archive' and then run build&test on it... In this > way, I can make sure that the archive I deliver is tested properly. If > you do your testing in the working tree, sometimes uncommitted or some > other files that are left over from previous builds may affect result. > So, if it takes considerable time anyhow, why do not do clean build and > test? And if you worry about compilation time, you can use ccache. It is not clear for me. Yes, I have to get some fixed version to reproduce the bug reported by someone. Then I need to fix it and commit the change back (on the head). Also, it is obvious to reproduce the issue and test the fix on the tip. Can do this with 'git archive'? BTW, doesn't 'git archive' sync to some version that I probably already have in other clone? ;-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html