[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: `about-emacs' - what about the revno?

From: Christoph
Subject: Re: `about-emacs' - what about the revno?
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 13:06:59 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2

On 8/28/2010 9:57 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

If the "revno" is important info for identifying an Emacs build, then perhaps we
should include it in such user-facing info.  If not, then perhaps developers
could refer in some other way (by date?) to the code that contains a given fix.

This has come up before, but the discussion was inconclusive (IIRC)
because of 2 reasons:

   . revno is not unique: two different branches can have the same
     revno for two very different code bases

   . revision-id, an alternative method of specifying a revision, _is_
     unique, but it's long and a mouthful:


In general, a bugfix should appear in the ChangeLog files with the bug
number, so you should be able to track bugfxes that way.

I too think having the revision available somewhere would be helpful to identify the weekly snapshot builds. Just a date is too coarse in some cases, imho.

The revno is indeed not unique globally, but if the branch is known, it is, right? So, why don't we supply to pieces of information: the revno and the name of the branch, e.g. the branch nick (available through bzr version-info).

For Windows, we could implement another make target, e.g. make snapshot, which uses make dist (for building the binary distribution) but also inserts the revno and branch nick information somewhere. I am not sure how useful this information is for official releases, but if it is considered useful, we can just add this to make dist even.

I like the combination of revno and branch name better than the revision-id. It seems easier to correlate these with the current state of the trunk using bzr log.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]