This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Tag reorg

From: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
To: rasky at develer dot com
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:39:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Tag reorg
References: <1130640885.8960.37.camel@linux.site> <m3y84bwq2f.fsf@gossamer.airs.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0510301135220.19187@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <035401c5dd81$580cca00$3eb82997@bagio> <1130706527.8960.87.camel@linux.site> <200510311825.j9VIPeWj006558@greed.delorie.com> <04ca01c5de51$7263fd80$bf03030a@trilan>

> Why do we need snapshot tags? Can't we generate snapshots using the
> -r {2005-11-14} syntax?

Well, *I* prefer using an absolute timestamp (date and time) for the
snapshot checkout, because otherwise you may be off by a checkout.
But, we *did* tag them before, and I was only thinking about SVN
metadata efficiency, not policy.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Tag reorg
  - From: Giovanni Bajo

References:
- Tag reorg
  - From: Daniel Berlin
- Re: Tag reorg
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Tag reorg
  - From: Joseph S. Myers
- Re: Tag reorg
  - From: Giovanni Bajo
- Re: Tag reorg
  - From: Daniel Berlin
- Re: Tag reorg
  - From: DJ Delorie
- Re: Tag reorg
  - From: Giovanni Bajo

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]