From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23871 invoked by alias); 4 Mar 2003 11:04:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 23864 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2003 11:04:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kerberos.suse.cz) (195.47.106.10) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 4 Mar 2003 11:04:09 -0000 Received: from chimera.suse.cz (chimera.suse.cz [10.20.0.2]) by kerberos.suse.cz (SuSE SMTP server) with ESMTP id 6ABF259D388; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:04:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from suse.cz (naga.suse.cz [10.20.1.16]) by chimera.suse.cz (8.11.0/8.11.0/SuSE Linux 8.11.0-0.4) with ESMTP id h24B48431254; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:04:08 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: chimera.suse.cz: Host naga.suse.cz [10.20.1.16] claimed to be suse.cz Message-ID: <3E648828.3080502@suse.cz> Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 11:04:00 -0000 From: Michal Ludvig Organization: SuSE CR User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: cs, cz, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [maint] Guidelines for experimental branches References: <3E63E3D3.6070401@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <3E63E3D3.6070401@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00077.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney wrote: > +@item @var{owner}_@var{name}-@var{YYYYMMDD}-branchpoint > +@itemx @var{owner}_@var{name}-@var{YYYYMMDD}-branch > +The branch point and corresponding branch tag. @var{YYYYMMDD} is the > +date that the branch was created. A branch is created using the Is it necessary to have the date in the name of the branch? IMHO it's fine for the branchpoint, as well as for mergepoints, but for the branch itself it's useless. People could much better remember words than 8-digits chunks and having to look on the webpage everytime, when I want to check out a branch is boring. I believe that calling your branch cagney_offbyone-branch would be descriptive enough and wouldn't collide with anything. Well, just my 2 cents. Michal Ludvig -- * SuSE CR, s.r.o * mludvig@suse.cz * (+420) 296.545.373 * http://www.suse.cz