[MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] proper version info for git.mplayerhq.hu

[Rowan James]

On 26/07/2010, at 7:40 PM, Rudolf Polzer wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 09:05:31AM +0000, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>> Rudolf Polzer <divVerent <at> alientrap.org> writes:
>> 
>>> I attached a small patch that, if mplayer is compiled from mplayer.git, uses
>>> the git commit hash instead of UNKNOWN as version info.
>> 
>> Wouldn't it be better to show the svn version from which the git repository was
>> cloned? (I believe this is how FFmpeg does it.)
> 
> Only as long as the git stays read-only. Just because no such move is planned
> YET, it does not mean it won't happen in some years.
> 
> I attached a more elaborate version. It now shows, "in order of likelihood":
> <...>


Where there is an ID for a commit in 'master' included, do you mean 'origin/master'?

The building user's 'master' branch could potentially include any number of local commits never to be pushed - in fact, it's the default HEAD for such commits to be added to; and you really don't want to squelch the origin commit it was based on.  I know I do all sorts of weird and wonderful things with my local master for my 'day job' between pushes.

I like the showing of SVN revision where it's available; but once there are git commits involved, you want to make sure you indicate which (origin/master) commit is most recent in the current branch, and as you mention, _if_ there are any others.

So, to fit my pattern-substitution oriented thought process:

(official)(+local tracked)(+LOCAL)-4.4.1

Where:
'official' would be either the SVN r.#, or the origin/master commit ID
'local tracked' would be the latest git commit ID on the current branch, if different from 'official' - nothing for SVN-sourced working copies.
'+LOCAL' indicates untracked changes, as before

Even this doesn't sit well with users cloning from each other (interesting mental image...); as origin/master will point to whatever remote branch they started with.  The effect of that should be limited though, the ID will just not be any commit in the official repo...

--
I know I'm new to the list (Greetings!  btw), and I especially don't want to give the impression that I don't support this change, or that I'm here to nitpick.  I've just been bitten hard by ambiguous versioning in bug reports.