RE: [RFC] Build System Documentation

Then we will need to purchase a certificate for that server unless Eric knows where we can get a domain named signed cert.

Kind regards / Cordialement / Mit freundlichen Grüssen
Danny

 
Danny McKinney . Senior Systems Programmer - Technology Service Management, Asset Management . SunGard
DDI +01 816 460 3226 . Mob +01 816 506 9639

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:danielsh_at_elego.de]
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 2:04 PM
To: Gabriela Gibson
Cc: Subversion Development
Subject: Re: [RFC] Build System Documentation

Gabriela Gibson wrote on Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 14:42:15 +0000:
> On 22/02/13 00:45, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> % svn log -qv -l1 -r 1:HEAD
>> subversion/tests/cmdline/atomic-ra-revprop-change.c
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---
>> r965054 | danielsh | 2010-07-17 14:23:38 +0300 (Sat, 17 Jul 2010)
>> Changed paths:
>> M /subversion/branches/atomic-revprop/build.conf
>> M /subversion/branches/atomic-revprop/subversion/tests/cmdline
>> A /subversion/branches/atomic-revprop/subversion/tests/cmdline/atomic-ra-revprop-change.c
>> ...
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---
>
> Thanks, I exchanged examples. I will add gtest in the same way as the
> external example, once it is ready.
>
>> (which already shows that you forgot to show the svn:ignore property
>> mods)
>
> I'm not sure what you mean here?
>

When I added atomic-ra-revprop-change.c, I would have also added 'atomic-ra-revprop-change' to svn:ignore on subversion/tests/cmdline/, so that the compiled binary (actually, the libtool wrapper script) doesn't spam 'svn status' in in-tree builds. r965054 shows that but your patch didn't.

>> More accurately, "configuration files for the hudson buildslaves we
>> once tried to configure". They're not part of the build system.
>>
> (should those files be removed from trunk/build ?)

+1, assuming they are unused.

Are they unused? https://builds.apache.org/ shows jobs for 1.6.x (I don't really care about their status, since the lack of 1.7.x jobs suggests those are unmaintained); jobs for trunk which fail; and javadoc and doxygen jobs which pass. So I guess the trunk and 1.6.x jobs can be removed from HEAD, but not the javadoc+doxyge jobs.
Received on 2013-02-22 22:13:25 CET