Re: Re-done kernel archive - real one?

On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 01:08:51PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Russell King wrote:

quoted

This will (and does) do exactly what I want.  I'll also read into the
above a request that you want it in forward date order. 8)

No, I actually don't _think_ I care. In many ways I'm more used to
"reverse date order", because that's usually how you view a changelog
(with a pager, and most recent changes at the top).

Which one makes sense when asking me to merge? I don't know, and I don't
think it really even matters, but maybe we can add a "for now" to whatever 
decision you end up coming to?

It's trivial to change - it's either sort -n or sort -nr !

I'll pick the reverse format so that we generate the changelog in the
order which people have come to expect from our previous set of tools.
Consistency with existing practises is a good thing at this point.

-- 
Russell King

On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Russell King wrote:

It's trivial to change - it's either sort -n or sort -nr !

Yes.

Btw, it might make sense to do the "grep" before the sort, since the sort 
doesn't scale as nicely with lots of output. On the other hand, then the 
grep pattern needs to be a bit more complex (so that it doesn't pick up on 
things that have _parents_ with ":1"). I think the rev-tree output is 
obvious enough that it's pretty trivial to grep for..

		Linus