Re: RFC: DEP-14: Recommended layout for Git packaging repositories
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:43:49PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ron writes ("Re: RFC: DEP-14: Recommended layout for Git packaging repositories"):
> > Right, gitweb, cgit, gitk, etc. are all going to do exactly the same
> > thing, take them from the DAG of the repo. They are unlikely to care
> > about how the tag names would textually sort (and even less likely to
> > sort them in the order that dpkg would consider them in).
>
> Looking at the DAG of the repo doesn't necessarily let you compare
> versions in different suites.
There is more information available to you than just the DAG though.
> Worse, unless I'm mistaken, there are some current workflows which
> involve subsequent uploads to the same suite not necessarily being
> fast forwards.
Right, and like you already noted, there's potential for ambiguity
in tag names anyway once the illegal characters have been mangled.
And then the totally separate question of how upstream tags might
be named and might sort relative to your Debian ones.
Which is basically why I originally said that there isn't a generic
way to solve this for everyone and every use. It really depends on
exactly why you want them ordered and the collating sequence (or
other constraint) you want them them ordered with.
> I think it is essential that tags can be ordered by their name, rather
> than by looking at the commit graph.
I'm all for letting people do exactly what solves their problems best
in their own repos. I'm just trying to get a sense of what problems
people can identify that need consideration for making best practice
type recommendations.
What exactly is your use case you feel this is essential for?
Ron
Reply to: