dist-git tag question

[Peter Hutterer]

On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 12:55:09AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote:
> > Jarod Wilson wrote:
> >> I'm not having any problems submitting builds and adding tags by hand
> >> *which is exactly what we did in cvs*. What exactly is ESSENTIAL about
> >> the nvr tags being automated for you?
> >
> > The fact that most builds will end up with no named tags at all because
> > dist-git doesn't enforce manual tagging nor is it in the packager SOP.
> > Having successfully built versions be tagged in the SCM so that the sources
> > corresponding to a given NVR can be easily checked out at any time was
> > posted as one of the essential requirements on the SCM setup. The current
> > implementation does not comply to that essential requirement.
> 
> Define "easily". I can look at koji for a specific build n-v-r, and
> get its git hash quite easily. Then I can tell git to show me the tree
> when it was at that git hash. Not as easy as if n-v-r tags were
> already in place, which would avoid the need to talk to koji, but
> still hardly hard.
> 
> > Thus, this is
> > a showstopper which should have blocked putting dist-git into production.
> 
> See above.
> 
> > Plus, automatic tagging was promised as THE reason we switch to dist-git in
> > the first place.
> 
> Huh? "THE" reason? Um, no. And there *are* automatic tags. They're
> call git hashes.

I don't think git hashes are an equivalent to the nvr tags though. I may
have multiple commits for each nvr, a tag that explicitly specifies which
version ended up as an rpm in koji would be quite helpful. I have troubles
remembering hashes long-term, nvr is marginally easier. it also simplifies
things like "git diff foo-1.2-1..foo-1.2-2" or the automation of that
process.

Cheers,
  Peter