[hackers] Patch naming on the wiki

From: David Phillips <dbphillipsnz_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 00:18:03 +1300

Just wondering what the rest of the community reckons about an issue
that popped up briefly on IRC.

I'll start with an example: some patches, for a long time, have been
named `dwm-6.1-fibwibble.diff`—long before dwm-6.1 was released. When
I was more of a newbie, this was confusing. Now, though, I do
understand that it was really just a patch against master "in
anticipation" of the next version/tag.

It all seems fine before this version is released, because "everyone
knows 6.1 isn't out yet," so it "must be a patch against master." It
gets confusing though, because some patches stop being updated to the
latest master, so when the new version actually arrives, these patches
which look like they will apply, whereas they are actually patches
against some old ref, perhaps from months or years ago

What I'm proposing, or rather asking for the community opinion on, is
whether or not we continue naming (what are really git master) patches
like this.

What I propose is what a lot of patches already use, which is:

* foo-[short commit hash].diff
* foo-YYYYMMDD.diff
* foo-YYYY-MM-DD.diff

or a combination/mish-mash of the above.

(It might be good to settle on the (standard) YYYY-MM-DD rather than
YYYYMMDD in this discussion as well)

What do you all think?
Received on Mon Nov 09 2015 - 12:18:03 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Nov 09 2015 - 12:24:11 CET