On 2008-09-16 09:32, Steve Povilaitis wrote:
> What else folks?
Well, any argument against any of the svn:keywords works for log
too. $log$ is just worse than the other substitutions.
> Also, for every tagged release we do for the customer they're going to want
> an export of the source with the revision log for each file appended to the
> beginning of the file. Have any of you had to do something along those lines
> and would you mind sharing how you accomplished it?
I think it's common to try to use substitution keywords in the
source control system to handle release engineering problems
like this. The releng I take care of stamps the current revision
number of the repository and other interesting facts into the
source files prior to compiling them and then stamps the object
files with a SHA-1 digest of their content for tamper/error
detection. There's no reason I couldn't stick an entire svn log
into the source files prior to building them. Assuming your
sources are archived permanently for a release build, I don't
really see anything wrong with stamping the log into them. If
disaster strikes and your repository is irreparibly destroyed,
your archived release sources have some extra information in them.
Of course, it'd be smarter to just archive your whole repository at
release time and put it in the safe place where your archived
sources would go instead. If you're truly worried about the end
times, keep a copy of your compilers, subversion itself, and your
releng OS in the same super-safe place. That's my $0.02.
Alec.Kloss_at_oracle.com Oracle Middleware
PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x432B9956
Received on 2008-09-16 15:52:08 CEST
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored