On Mon, 2019-04-15 at 11:53 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 12:34:58PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
Interestingly[2] enough, a few releases seem to have partially or completely slipped through the cracks:
version commit tag tarball --------- -------------- ----- --------- v0.1.2 | 567b42ce6a07 | no | no v0.1.5 | 786e029cd743 | no | yes v0.4.0 | 6cb028991705 | no | yes v0.4.3 | 7db4c905d745 | no | yes v0.4.5 | 9d3d43436eac | no | yes
Note that I stopped checking at v0.6.5, so there might actually be more. [...] As for the missing release commits, I see no harm in creating them retroactively for completeness' sake, but if nobody can be bothered doing that I'll also fully understand :)
We should create the missing ones. When we stopped using the LIBVIRT_X_Y_Z tag naming scheme, our intention was to create new vX.Y.Z tags to match all the original LIBVIRT_X_Y_Z tags that we had.
Perhaps I was not clear enough: for all releases in the table above, there is neither a vX.Y.Z nor a LIBVIRT_X_Y_Z tag. So it looks like the switch has been carried through as intended, it's just that some releases were never tagged in the first place.
Thoughts?
IMHO deleting "clutter" is a non-goal. GIT history should be append only, and never changed after the fact.
I obviously don't agree when it comes to this specific case :) But noted. -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization