From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1757517AbdELBuR (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 11 May 2017 21:50:17 -0400
Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:42073 "EHLO ozlabs.org"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1757479AbdELBuQ (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 11 May 2017 21:50:16 -0400
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits?
In-Reply-To: <1de8bc32-ebac-141a-080a-ef1c5a149904@landley.net>
References: <87k25ol41u.fsf@xmission.com> <CA+55aFxj4Oe8+DbNLzk+SKoW99MTeF+m1SAiC4hgW=bN2dpvEQ@mail.gmail.com> <87h90rj2ub.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> <1de8bc32-ebac-141a-080a-ef1c5a149904@landley.net>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.21 (https://notmuchmail.org)
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 11:50:10 +1000
Message-ID: <87r2zuc08d.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> writes:

> On 05/11/2017 01:59 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
>> 
>>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Eric W. Biederman
>>> <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thomas Gleixner appears to have a tree with all of those same commits
>>>> except with the BKrev tags stripped out.
>>>
>>> That's the best import - so use that tree by Thomas, and just use the
>>> git revision numbers in it (and say "tglx's linux-history tree" or
>>> something).
>> 
>> I've been using this one by Rob Landley which seems good:
>> 
>> https://landley.net/kdocs/fullhist/
>>
>> It's grafted into the modern history so you can search seamlessly
>> between the two which is pretty nice. I don't see any Bitkeeper tags
>> though.
>
> I went through and found/tagged the major old releases, did I forget to
> upload a new tarball after that?

No you didn't forget, I see several:

  refs/tags/v1.2.0
  refs/tags/v2.6.0
  refs/tags/v4.5-rc3
  refs/tags/v2.4.0
  refs/tags/v1.0.0
  refs/tags/v2.2.0
  refs/tags/v2.0.0
  refs/tags/v4.5-rc4
  refs/tags/v4.5-rc5
  refs/tags/v4.5-rc2
  refs/tags/v0.0.1
  refs/tags/v4.5-rc1


But in the original mail Eric was wanting to refer to a specific
Bitkeeper revision using the BK revision id, eg:

  Fixes: BKrev: 3e8e57a1JvR25MkFRNzoz85l2Gzccg ("[PATCH] linux-2.5.66-signal-cleanup.patch")

In your tree that is c3c107051660 ("[PATCH] linux-2.5.66-signal-cleanup.patch"),
but you don't have the 3e8e57a1JvR25MkFRNzoz85l2Gzccg revision recorded
anywhere that I can see.

cheers