Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jonny Lamb <jonny@debian.org>
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org

* Package name : gitg
Version : 0.0.0+git+37ec0c
Upstream Author : Jesse van den Kieboom <jesse@icecrew.nl>
* URL : http://git.gnome.org/cgit/gitg/
* License : GPLv2
Description : git repository viewer for gtk+/GNOME

gitg is a fast GTK2 git repository for the GNOME desktop. It
currently features:
.
* Loading large repositories very fast
* Show/browse repository history
* Show highlighted revision diff
* Browse file tree of a revision and export by drag and drop
* Search in the revision history on subject, author or hash
* Switch between history view of branches easily
* Commit view providing per hunk stage/unstage and commit

--
Jonny Lamb, UK
jonny@debian.org

On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 23:41:46 +0000, Jonny Lamb wrote:

> * Package name : gitg
> Version : 0.0.0+git+37ec0c
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Is it stable enough, even for unstable?

David

--
. '`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

* Jonny Lamb [Fri, 13 Feb 2009 23:41:46 +0000]:

> Version : 0.0.0+git+37ec0c

I don't know what your further plans of versioning are for Git snapshot
(incrementing the micro release number?), but I thought I'd point out
that SHA1 are not sensibly sortable, just in case.

Cheers,

--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org

Excuse me for thinking a banana-eating contest was about eating a banana!
-- Paris Geller


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 11:17:42 +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:

> * Jonny Lamb [Fri, 13 Feb 2009 23:41:46 +0000]:
>
> > Version : 0.0.0+git+37ec0c
>
> I don't know what your further plans of versioning are for Git snapshot
> (incrementing the micro release number?), but I thought I'd point out
> that SHA1 are not sensibly sortable, just in case.

Probably something like 0.0.0+git<num>~<sha> would work? Where <num> is
incremented at each snapshot packaging.

David

--
. '`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

hiya,

On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 11:20:44AM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 11:17:42 +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
>
> > * Jonny Lamb [Fri, 13 Feb 2009 23:41:46 +0000]:
> >
> > > Version : 0.0.0+git+37ec0c
> >
> > I don't know what your further plans of versioning are for Git snapshot
> > (incrementing the micro release number?), but I thought I'd point out
> > that SHA1 are not sensibly sortable, just in case.
>
> Probably something like 0.0.0+git<num>~<sha> would work? Where <num> is
> incremented at each snapshot packaging.

when i've had to do this in the past i think i did something like
<vers>~<YYYYMMDD>.git.<sha>. this way you get lots of relevant info, the
fact that it's a prerelease of <vers>, the date the snapshot was taken,
the fact that it's a git snapshot, and the sha sum. and of course it's
sortable.

also why 0.0.0, and not just 0? just makes it unnecessarily longer imho...


sean

On Sat, Feb 14, 08:12:45 +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> Is it stable enough, even for unstable?

I've been using it for a little while and I think so, yes.

--
Jonny Lamb, UK
jonny@debian.org

On Sat, Feb 14, 11:17:42 +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> I don't know what your further plans of versioning are for Git snapshot
> (incrementing the micro release number?), but I thought I'd point out
> that SHA1 are not sensibly sortable, just in case.

Right. I suspect some releases will start popping out soon which will
make this easier. Otherwise I will indeed increment the micro version
number.

Thanks for highlighting this.

--
Jonny Lamb, UK
jonny@debian.org

* Jonny Lamb [Sat, 14 Feb 2009 14:55:42 +0000]:

> On Sat, Feb 14, 08:12:45 +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> > Is it stable enough, even for unstable?

> I've been using it for a little while and I think so, yes.

Do you have binary packages anywhere? I'd like to give it a try without
having to compile it.

Thanks,

--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org

Will you just stand still?
-- Luke Danes


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

]] sean finney

| when i've had to do this in the past i think i did something like
| <vers>~<YYYYMMDD>.git.<sha>. this way you get lots of relevant info, the
| fact that it's a prerelease of <vers>, the date the snapshot was taken,
| the fact that it's a git snapshot, and the sha sum. and of course it's
| sortable.

If you use $vers~$ymd.git.$sha or something like that, please do make
sure the version number slightly bigger than zero. Having version
numbers that are positive and less than 0 sometimes breaks tools.

--
Tollef Fog Heen
Redpill Linpro -- Changing the game!
t: +47 21 54 41 73


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

On Sat, Feb 14, 16:25:41 +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> Do you have binary packages anywhere? I'd like to give it a try without
> having to compile it.

Sure. I threw some i386 and amd64 packages here:

http://people.debian.org/~jonny/gitg/

--
Jonny Lamb, UK
jonny@debian.org