From: Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org>
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 13:31:09 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC] git integrated bugtracking
Message-ID: <20070603133109.GD14336@artemis>
In-Reply-To: <878xb19ot5.fsf@graviton.dyn.troilus.org>

On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 08:59:18AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> Pierre Habouzit writes:
>
> >   The other problem I see is that at the time a bug gets reported, the
> > user knows it's found at a commit say 'X'. But it could in fact have
> > been generated at a commit Y, with this pattern:
> >
> >   --o---o---Y---o---o---o---o---X---o---o--> master
> >                      \
> >                       o---o---o---o---o---o--> branch B
> 
> Mainly for that reason, I would suggest having it outside the code
> base's namespace: probably a different root in the same $GIT_DIR, but
> I can see people wanting to have a separate $GIT_DIR.  If the database
> tracks bugs by what commit(s) introduce or expose the bug -- at least
> once that is known -- then you get nearly free tracking of which
> branches have the bug without having to check out largely redundant
> trees.

  Sure, but if it's completely out-of-tree, then cloning a repository
don't allow you to get the bug databases with it for free. I mean it'd
be great to have it somehow linked to the repository, but also I agree
that not everybody wants to clone the whole bugs databases. So maybe it
should just be in another shadow branch that annotates the devel ones.
Hmmm I definitely need to read the git-note thread...

-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org