Roll out of new code to codebrowse.launchpad.net

[Martin Pitt]

Hi Michael,

Michael Hudson [2007-07-05  9:02 +0100]:
> > Why are these timestamps and hashes necessary? URLs like this don't
> > look very stable,
> 
> Actually, they are more stable that a URL based on revision numbers,
> because revision numbers aren't stable in the face of --push-overwrite.

Hm, but in the case of --overwrite you cannot gurarantee anything
anyway, can you? I think using --overwrite should generally be
avoided on public branches.

> > http://codebrowse.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/restricted-manager/trunk/revision/124
> 
> Did you try that?  It actually works, though there's no way at all to
> find this out...

No, I didn't actually try it, I just made it up on the fly. It's
really cool that it actually works!

> Again,
> http://codebrowse.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/restricted-manager/trunk/annotate/head:/setup.py

Splendid, thanks!

> These alternate urls have been possible for a while now, but probably
> what should change is that codebrowse should generate them.  This isn't
> going to be totally trivial, loggerhead works internally with rev- and
> file-ids for good reasons, but it should probably be done.

I agree, that would be really nice.

Thanks a lot,

Martin

-- 
Martin Pitt        http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer   http://www.ubuntu.com
Debian Developer   http://www.debian.org