Re: RFC: CHANGES

Branko Čibej <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
> > svn, version 0.17.1 (dev build)
> >
> >it will say
> >
> > svn, dev build, revision 4960
> >
> That's not good. People will want to know the last released version
> previous to a build.

Yeah, that should have been

     svn, 0.18.1 dev build (revision 4960)

> So are you suggesting we run svnversion as part of the build process? If
> so, I invite you to hack that yourself, instead of fobbing it off on an
> unsuspecting RM volunteer. :-)

Oh, hmmm. I didn't think through all the complexities of what I was
suggesting. Yes, it's certainly not fair to ask Michael to take that
on right now.

> Can we please, please stop fooling around with this? Let's just admit
> that our labelling strategy is less than perfect, and just leave it at
> that.Or we can just document that the revision number in the version tag
> always comes off the release branch, not the trunk -- end of problem.

For now, let's just do that, yes. (So Michael, just use the head
revision for your VERSION label to dist.sh.)

I don't see any need to "stop fooling around with this" permanently,
although I agree that this is not the time to bother with it.
Perfection, or something reasonably close, *is* achievable here; the
only thing we need to admit is that we're too busy to do it right now.

I promise not to bring it up again until at least, say, Beta :-).

-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Feb 19 20:47:03 2003