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

Re: Proposal for $Revision$ keyword amendment

From: Vincent Starre <vstarre_at_comcast.net>
Date: 2005-10-04 14:26:42 CEST

Molle Bestefich wrote:

>Granted, I can do 'svn info | grep URL: | awk -F/ '{print $NF'}' and
>somehow stuff that into a file that will get compiled in. That
>suffers from a lot of the same problems already mentioned for other
>non-keyword-based proposals, and furthermore it doesn't work for
>people releasing off trunk - think nightlies and the like.

faced with the same situation, I put that line into the makefile. (well,
I used svnversion for what I was doing)
what you seem to be describing is the $HeadURL keyword, there.

of course, in that same file, we also put the copyright, build date,
etc. The only drawback was making a commit which changed every file to
include build.h- so I had to update everywhere! (what? I'm lazy!)

I havent been reading the thread, so I'm sure you've already mentioned
reasons why that's unacceptable (*and I'm also of the "don't force
people to come up with solutions that would make much more sense as a
built-in feature" mindset)

In our build, we call the version returned by svnversion the "global
revision", and (*opinion) it really doesnt make sense to associate
whole-directory information with a file.

of course, the "Global Revision" doesnt show up in the source files
themselves, but one can tend to assume that those who have the source
already know where they got it from :)

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Oct 4 14:27:50 2005

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.