On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 08:34:00AM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> > I just noticed that we forgot to bump the displayed copyright year.
> > Fixed in r1667941 and nominated for backport to 1.9.x, 1.8.x and 1.7.x.
> > I also vetoed the 1.7.20 and 1.8.13 releases because of the wrong year
> > ... we really shouldn't release with wrong legalese, and we already
> > allowed 1.9.0-beta1 to slip through with that buglet.
> >
> > Sorry about not noticing this earlier, I realize we already have enough
> > votes tor 1.7.20 and 1.8.13; but I really think we should pull these
> > tarballs.
> >
> > -- Brane
>
> If we decide to pull these releases based on this problem, then I'm
> against making everyone re-run tests for this. Just allow people to
> diff the tarballs and submit a new signature based on that.
>
> Could we have a buildbot test for this kind of problem?
> Should our rat-report bot (which I can't seem to locate in the maze
> of buildbot right now) perhaps check for this?
>
Yes, I think we should add a simple C test calling svn_version_extended.
If the year differs from the actual, FAIL. Have a grace period from Dec 15
to Jan 15. That test would act as a simple reminder.
I'd be happy to implement it.
-- Stefan^2.
Received on 2015-03-20 14:32:03 CET