cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Clelland <iclell...@google.com>
Subject Re: File version numbers in release branches
Date Tue, 02 Apr 2013 20:14:18 GMT
I'm all for running `git rev-parse HEAD` when running jake, and putting the
output somewhere where a dev can easily get to it -- ideally in the
compiled JS file itself, so there's no doubt about what version is being
used.

(Dropping the suggestion to use the current date in this case, if it's
auto-generated)

While we're at it, I would run something like `git status --porcelain |
grep -v '^\?'` with it, to report whether there were any modified files
since the commit, and calling the resulting version master-<hash>-modified
if there are.

Ian


On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:

> Do you mean to suggest that the current commit hash is inserted when e.g.
> running jake?  I'de +1 that.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I like the 'master' version suggestion.
> >
> > Implementation details aside - this could be a packaging artifact (coho?)
> > that puts a file with the current branch-hash in it.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Ian Clelland <iclelland@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > From cordova-dev, hash 125dca5:
> > > > Incrememnting the version can be done on the branch, right? This
> > doesn't
> > > need to be added back to master.
> > >
> > > I think that generally the answer to that commit message should be
> 'yes',
> > > we shouldn't be making the claim that the master branch represents any
> > > particular version of cordova.
> > >
> > > If the files in the master branch were going to have a version at all,
> it
> > > would be something like '2.7.0-prerelease', to indicate what the code
> is
> > > going to become. After some discussions here, though, I think it is
> > > probably best just to change the versions of all of the files to
> 'master'
> > > -- to have that be the permanent revision number for the master branch.
> > >
> > > (The only reason I can think to have a version associated with those
> > files
> > > is so that people reporting bugs can say "I'm running this version".
> > > However, if they're running files checked out of the master branch on
> > > github, then we need to know more specifically what commit they're
> using.
> > > It would be far more useful for them to be able to say "It's version
> > > master-20130402", or to include the commit hash, as "master-5a6b48a",
> > than
> > > a general "2.7.0-pre".)
> > >
> > > Ian
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message