On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 12:43:01PM +0100, Markus Teich wrote:
>Jack L. Frost wrote:
>> Agreed that the way patches are being named right now is confusing. Dates
>> and/or refs in the name would be very much appreciated.
>
>Use shortrefs for the filename, but use dates on the wikipage or at least
>annotate the hyperlink with the date.
>
>Then you can quickly see how old a patch is and estimate how much work it would
>be to update it to the current HEAD. Also thanks to the shortref in the filename
>you can easily find the commit where it definitely worked to have a starting
>point for bisection if there are any problems after updating the patch to
>current HEAD.
Yeah, I think using the date format would raise many objects.
The shortref can check the date anyway. I think it is best that the
filename to be simple:
dwm-abcde930-name.diff
And we put the date (and maybe size) after the file like this:
dwm-abcde930-name.diff (20K) (2015-02-29)
Reasons not to use date: There can be several commits a day.
--
_____________________________________
< Do what you like, like what you do. >
-------------------------------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||
Received on Mon Nov 09 2015 - 13:11:05 CET