[pacman-dev] namcap 2.8.1 and namcap 2.99

[Dan McGee]

On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Rémy Oudompheng
<remyoudompheng at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2011/2/7 Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Rémy Oudompheng
>> <remyoudompheng at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I am willing to release a 2.8.1 version of namcap corresponding to the
>>> namcap-2.x branch of the repository. It includes the following
>>> changes:
>>> * revert a dictatorial choice of valid filename characters to include
>>> all reasonable ASCII characters
>>> * fix the emptydir rule that did not work
>>> * the extravars rule was never run (and didn't know options was a
>>> standard variable)
>>> * an even bigger test suite.
>>>
>>> The rules with no test cases are : depends, elffiles, kdeprograms,
>>> licensepkg, lotsofdocs, missingbackups, perllocal, rpath,
>>> scrollkeeper, symlink.
>> Looks like you didn't push the 2.8 tag to the official repo yet. But
>> 2.8.1 sounds fine.
>>
>> I've also noticed you are breaking git commit message convention a
>> bit- you should have a one line summary, then a blank line, then your
>> message. See http://projects.archlinux.org/namcap.git/commit/?id=eb13cb04c7a2bc3264c63e6fa882633a0a54e773
>> for why it looks odd doing it the way you have a few times.
>
> I guess it's too late to correct this unless I arbitrarily completely
> rewrite the branch. I'll try to pay attention to that later.
Yes, I didn't mean go back and fix it- you never ever want to rewrite
history once you've pushed it public to a main branch.

> I think I did git push --all instead of git push --tags. That would
> explain the absence of the tag in the central repository.
Tags have to be explicitly pushed, so --all doesn't do it. I usually
just do "git push master" to be explicit, and then "git push --tags".

-Dan