openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mechtilde <...@mechtilde.de>
Subject Re: get Revision from Git (short Hash)
Date Thu, 15 Aug 2019 12:52:15 GMT
Hello,

we should commit to trunk and if that code should also be in 42x or 417
we can cherry- pick the commit.

regards

Mechtilde

Am 15.08.19 um 14:02 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> Anyone have issues if we also commit to the 42X and 417 branches?
> 
>> On Aug 15, 2019, at 1:03 AM, Peter Kovacs <petko@Apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> I pushed the change to gitbox trunk.
>>
>> On 15.08.19 00:15, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:07 PM Matthias Seidel <matthias.seidel@hamburg.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Kay,
>>>>
>>>> Am 15.08.19 um 00:02 schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:24 PM Marcus <marcus.mail@wtnet.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 14.08.19 um 22:02 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>> On Aug 14, 2019, at 10:51 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>> We already have the build id, the build
>>>>>>>>> date and now the git hash (which is a unique link to
the last commit
>>>> it
>>>>>>>>> was based on)
>>>>>>>>> This is how we did it with SVN, why should we change
it?
>>>>>>>> Because we are dropping information. The SVN revisions are
always
>>>>>> increasing, and thus (independent on the build date, which can be
at any
>>>>>> moment) I can compare two builds and retain information on which
came
>>>> first.
>>>>>>>> With git of course this doesn't hold, i.e., you cannot say
which
>>>> commit
>>>>>> came earlier between abcd1234 and 5678abcd. So I see some added value
>>>> if we
>>>>>> enrich it this way.
>>>>>>> Is that needed though? I had thought the basic reason for having
the
>>>> SVN
>>>>>> ID is that the end-user knows, for sure, which SVN revision their
app
>>>> was
>>>>>> built from.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it's unrealistic that the commit was done, e.g., today but the build
>>>>>> weeks later. So, Git hash and build date is not done at the exact
same
>>>>>> date and time. But nearly. And here it think it's sufficiant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But when we decide to prefix the hash with a date value it's OK for
me,
>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I think the date and hash should be displayed in the "build information"
>>>>> screen as the revision information was previously. In Jim's sample
>>>> display,
>>>>> although the date is displayed, there is no indication of actual
>>>> "revision"
>>>>> (hash).
>>>> This is simply because the code we are discussing about is still not
>>>> committed.
>>>>
>>>> I applied Peters patch and it looks like this:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/tkal1y9b09vrhse/VirtualBox_Windows%2010%20AOO-Build_14_08_2019_16_14_33.png?dl=0
>>>>
>>>> Matthias
>>>>
>>> OK. Good.
>>>
>>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org <mailto:dev-help@openoffice.apache.org>
> 

-- 
Mechtilde Stehmann
## Apache OpenOffice
## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
## Debian Developer
## PGP encryption welcome
## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899  39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F


Mime
View raw message