[flashrom] Proposed changes to flashrom hosting and workflow

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

On 10.08.2015 19:46, Patrick Georgi wrote:
> I wanted to note that mercurial can use git servers in the backend:
> http://hg-git.github.io/

Hm. That sounds promising, thanks.



On 08.08.2015 15:04, Patrick Georgi wrote:
> 2015-08-08 10:23 GMT+02:00 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
> <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
> <mailto:c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net>>:
>
>     If there really is a large demand for a non-svn hosting, I would
>     be open
>     to using mercurial (as master) because it at least has some sort of
>     usability and can provide (conceptually limited) version numbers.
>     I have
>     worked for a few years with mercurial and the version numbers are
>     extremely helpful even if they are per-branch and only semi-stable.
>
> mercurial's notion of a monotonic commit counter (that you're looking
> for if I understand you correctly) has about the same quality as git
> describe's commits-since-last-tag counter.
>  
> For a global numbering scheme, you could just (automatically) tag
> every single commit of a certain branch (master, release, ...) with a
> monotonic counter. That's more or less what the svn-to-git translation
> of tianocore is doing, for example (with tags following the scheme
> svn18670). That way, those numbers are actually global, unlike what
> mercurial is doing.
> Assume that the scheme is to use $version-$number since release: git
> describe would emit something like 0.9.9-40-5-gabcde, meaning that
> your tree is based on the tag 0.9.9-40 (globally unique), is 5 local
> commits away from that, with your current local commit id being abcde.

The auto-tag of every commit sounds like an option I could agree with.
It would preserve the convenience of the global strong svn commit ID
even for git.
However, I don't know if this would be acceptable for Stefan (especially
from a merging perspective).

Regards,
Carl-Daniel