From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@o2.pl>
To: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: gitweb: kernel versions in the history (feature request, probably)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 21:16:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4744921A.6000801@o2.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071121151831.GO1001@machine.or.cz>
Petr Baudis wrote, On 11/21/2007 04:18 PM:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 08:52:17AM +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>> ...
>> tags
>> 4 days ago v2.6.24-rc3 Linux 2.6.24-rc3
>> 2 weeks ago v2.6.24-rc2 Linux 2.6.24-rc2
>> 4 weeks ago v2.6.24-rc1 Linux 2.6.24-rc1
>> 6 weeks ago v2.6.23 Linux 2.6.23
>>
>> which drives me crazy, because, without looking at the calendar, and
>> calculator, I don't really know which month was 6 weeks ago, and 4
>> days ago, either!
>
> I have myself never been sure if the relative times are a good idea or
> not. :-) Sometimes I hate them, sometimes they are more convenient...
>
> At any rate, if you click at the tag name, you should get tag page with
> full date.
So, it's so easy! Great! It seems I've to get used to this clicking
more. It seems I've become too cautious with this, when I've really
- really, waited after each click there. (I mean a few months ago,
and my connection was the same; sometimes, one such click took one
whole break for coffee.)
I seems, there are simply two kinds of people wrt. calendar/time. I'm
usually happy if I can figure by myself which day of week is today, but
I wouldn't even try with something like 4 days ago. But I understand
I'm not the brightest here...
So, maybe, some day, with: linux-kernel-for-dummies.org such things
could be reconsidered...
>
>> So, I go to the: http://www.eu.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/,
>> do some scrolling, look at this:
>> ChangeLog-2.6.23 09-Oct-2007 20:38 3.8M
>>
>> and only now I can guess, this napi patch didn't manage to 2.6.23.
>> Of course, usually I've to do a few more clicks and reading to make
>> sure where it really started.
>>
>> So, this could suggest this 2007-10-10 (probably stored with time
>> too), could be useful here... but it seems, I'm wrong.
>
> Yes, there are three scenarios:
>
> (i) The patch has been _created_ after the release date. It can't be in
> the release.
> (ii) The patch has been created before the release date, but _committed_
> after the release date. It can't be in the release either.
> (iii) The patch has been committed before the release date. It _still_
> might not be in the release if it comes from a different branch.
> Imagine, say, tglx accepting the patch in his branch, then Linus
> releasing new kernel version, and only _then_ Linus merging tglx's
> branch.
>
> So the time information isn't really too useful if you want to be any
> sort of reliable.
>
>> Of course, this problem doesn't look so hard if we forget about
>> git internals: I can imagine keeping a simple database, which
>> could simply retrieve commit numbers from these ChangeLogs, and
>> connecting this with gitweb's commit page as well... For
>> performance reasons, doing it only for stable and testing, so with
>> -rc 'precision' would be very helpful too.
>
> It isn't too hard if we don't forget about git internals either. It's
> just that getting this information might not be cheap. But maybe I'm
> wrong and this won't be a problem for sane projects. Someone should post
> a patch. ;-)
It looks, after Kay's notice, my main problem is solved. And your current
explanations are also very precious to me. Probably some things considered
here could be done a bit better in the future, but I guess there is enough
urgent work with git or kernel too, so let's say it's OK for now!
Thanks every good git people!
Jarek P.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-21 20:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20071120142042.GA4157@ff.dom.local>
2007-11-20 21:59 ` gitweb: kernel versions in the history (feature request, probably) Petr Baudis
2007-11-20 23:30 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-11-21 3:20 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-11-21 7:52 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-11-21 8:09 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-11-21 15:18 ` Petr Baudis
2007-11-21 16:44 ` Jakub Narebski
2007-11-21 20:16 ` Jarek Poplawski [this message]
2007-11-21 16:06 ` Kay Sievers
2007-11-21 19:29 ` Jarek Poplawski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4744921A.6000801@o2.pl \
--to=jarkao2@o2.pl \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pasky@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).