lastchange: give up on git-svn

lastchange: give up on git-svn

Just put the git hash in the revision fields.
Developers who are using git aren't making releases.

BUG=70909
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=72661

[tony, 2011-01-26 18:56:29]

LGTM

http://codereview.chromium.org/6348023/diff/1/build/util/lastchange.py
File build/util/lastchange.py (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6348023/diff/1/build/util/lastchange.py#newcode91
build/util/lastchange.py:91: version_info = FetchGitRevision(directory)
You could do: version_info = FetchSVNRevision(directory) or
FetchGitRevision(directory)
*shrug*

[Denis Lagno, 2011-01-26 18:59:31]

problem is that developers rarely build trunk, they build their customized
builds.  Still they do file bugreports, and they include info from about:version
into bugreports, so this info loses svn revision number.

[tony, 2011-01-26 19:02:12]

On 2011/01/26 18:59:31, Denis Lagno wrote:
> problem is that developers rarely build trunk, they build their customized
> builds.  Still they do file bugreports, and they include info from
about:version
> into bugreports, so this info loses svn revision number.

Can't the developer then re-map their hash to the svn revision? I mean, this is
still an improvement from before where there was no number, right?

[evanm, 2011-01-26 19:06:42]

On 2011/01/26 18:59:31, Denis Lagno wrote:
> problem is that developers rarely build trunk, they build their customized
> builds.  Still they do file bugreports, and they include info from
about:version
> into bugreports, so this info loses svn revision number.

In fact, git itself does something like this:
If you build a known release of git, you get a version number like 1.7.
If you build trunk, you get the hash as the version number.

(They also add "-dirty" if you have local changes on top of the hash, but I've
been fiddling with this for a week and I probably should be doing more useful
work!)

[Denis Lagno, 2011-01-26 19:08:33]

On 2011/01/26 19:02:12, tony wrote:
> On 2011/01/26 18:59:31, Denis Lagno wrote:
> > problem is that developers rarely build trunk, they build their customized
> > builds.  Still they do file bugreports, and they include info from
> about:version
> > into bugreports, so this info loses svn revision number.
> 
> Can't the developer then re-map their hash to the svn revision? I mean, this
is
> still an improvement from before where there was no number, right?

well, formally this LGTM

still, this hash bears no information.
I used to copy-paste info from about:version into bugreport, and now it requires
additional steps to insert svn revision number into bugreport as well.

[Denis Lagno, 2011-01-26 19:18:40]

> Can't the developer then re-map their hash to the svn revision?

no, it cannot be remapped.
because as we speak about non-trunk, last commit is usually some local
modification that has no sense for outside world.

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2011-01-26 19:19:57]

On 2011/01/26 19:18:40, Denis Lagno wrote:
> > Can't the developer then re-map their hash to the svn revision?
> 
> no, it cannot be remapped.
> because as we speak about non-trunk, last commit is usually some local
> modification that has no sense for outside world.

Yes, but that's useful information :) FWIW, a git hash is much more useful,
since I save the step to convert back the svn rev to the git hash :)