WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Add sequence number to 'xm info'

To: Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Add sequence number to 'xm info'
From: Dan Smith <danms@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 09:05:48 -0700
Cc: Xen Developers <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:03:48 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <cc771642dd285c3e22b2771ac04530b9@xxxxxxxxxx> (Hollis Blanchard's message of "Thu, 29 Sep 2005 10:45:32 -0500")
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <87r7b8x1kh.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx> <cc771642dd285c3e22b2771ac04530b9@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux)
HB> +If you want to compare two changesets, you already have the full
HB> +date right in front of you!

That's true.

HB> The revision number is a convenience for *local* operations, for
HB> example 'hg export 7033:7035'. It obviously should never be
HB> compared across different repositories "and just hope things work
HB> out ok."

I completely agree and understand.  Telling someone to try to resolve
their problem by checking out changeset 7033 would be a bad idea.
However, if we're talking about loosely grouping and sorting a month's
worth of test reports to make a determination about failure trends, I
think it's a valid way to do it.  It's quick and it doesn't require
any parsing of the date string.

Also, when I'm comparing two of my test machines to see which is
running a newer pull, I have to parse the date string with my eyes and
do timezone conversions to figure out the order.  Since my (and most,
I imagine) test machines are always running clones of the main repo,
the sequence numbers would always be valid.

Independent of how people choose to use the information, is there a
strong argument for not even showing it?

-- 
Dan Smith
IBM Linux Technology Center
Open Hypervisor Team
email: danms@xxxxxxxxxx


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel