[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Blessed Binary Release Numbers: WAS: svn on Redhat 9 fails on co

From: Files <files_at_poetryunlimited.com>
Date: 2003-11-12 16:32:32 CET

Karl, Julian, Mike and anyone else

(Directed to Karl, since he gave me this answer originally).

A few weeks ago, in answer to a question, you informed me that the BLESSED
release number (rXXXX) for a particular release build of subversion (not a
'dev build') matches the rXXXX listed in the CHANGES file. That way, all
binaries for a release display the correct rXXXX in response to the --version
flag.

I am hoping that the release tarball has this information encoded already.

When building from the /tags directory, setting the rXXXX is a manual process.
Which means that package maintainers are likely to use the tag revision unless
otherwise instructed. I myself, until recently, had been doing so, until you
informed me otherwise (at which point I made the Mandrake build set extract
said information from the CHANGES file).

I feel that having the CHANGES file out of step makes tracking the problems of
a particular released version of subversion difficult. I feel that it is a
"bad thing" <tm>.

Should we encourage package maintainers to ensure their BLESSED binary builds
coincide w/ the rXXXX listed in the CHANGES file so that all subversion issues
can be correctly identified as being from a particular subversion revision? I
do not feel this is major enough to warrant stricter controls, but a uniform
policy on release numbers would go a long way to making our 1.0 and post-1.0
more professional and more acceptable to management.

Instead of generating a perpetual chicken and egg scenario w/ different
release numbers for the same binary?

-- 
Shamim Islam
BA BS
David Summers said:
>
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Files wrote:
>> Barry Scott said:
>> > $ svn --version
>> > svn, version 0.32.1 (r7505)
>>
>> Is this the right number? I was under the impression that 0.32.1 was r7497.
>>
>> Was this a personal build? Sorry if this seems inapplicable, but I'm
>> wondering
>> if that might have something to do with your psvn error and such.
>>
>
> I'm just guessing but probably he is using my Subversion RPMs.  The r7505
> is the revision of the tag of the 0.32.1 release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Nov 12 16:33:21 2003

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.