Hi,
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Toralf Förster wrote:
> At Thursday 10 July 2008 21:29:07 Johannes Schindelin wrote :
>
> > On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Toralf Förster wrote:
> >
> > > I appended those strings to the names of my UML kernel executables.
> > > Unfortunately I didn't used the commit id and now I'm wondering
> > > whether git could accept v2.6.26-rc9-56 as well in future.
> >
> > If that were unambiguous, yes. But it is not.
>
> Ok, following the thread I understand why this feature isn't wanted by
> all. But for the given example (where I only pulled from another git
> tree) this could work, isn't it : ?
>
> tfoerste@n22 ~/devel/linux-2.6 $ git-log v2.6.26-rc9.. | perl -e '@c = grep { /^commit/ } <>; print map { $#c - $i++ . "\t" . $_ } @c'
The question is not so much if it would work, but what people would do
with this. They would probably include something in a mail to you like
"v2.6.26-rc9-111 stopped working!", you would test "v2.6.26-rc9-111" and
go back "but it still works!".
Because you are talking about two different things.
So, in what workflow would v2.6.26-rc9-111 actually be helpful? For
yourself working in your own lil' branch? I do not think so. HEAD~23 is
much more helpful in that case, since locally, you do not work so much
relative to a given tag, but relative to your current HEAD.
Hth,
Dscho
