Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-34943-apmail-flex-dev-archive=flex.apache.org@flex.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-flex-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-flex-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 63D7710E66
	for <apmail-flex-dev-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Thu,  6 Feb 2014 07:34:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 9307 invoked by uid 500); 6 Feb 2014 07:34:28 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-flex-dev-archive@flex.apache.org
Received: (qmail 8496 invoked by uid 500); 6 Feb 2014 07:34:26 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@flex.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:dev-help@flex.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@flex.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@flex.apache.org>
List-Id: <dev.flex.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@flex.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@flex.apache.org
Received: (qmail 8474 invoked by uid 99); 6 Feb 2014 07:34:25 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Feb 2014 07:34:25 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.6 required=5.0
	tests=SPF_PASS,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of maurice.amsellem@systar.com
 designates 66.129.85.153 as permitted sender)
Received: from [66.129.85.153] (HELO smtp02.myhostedservice.com)
 (66.129.85.153)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Feb 2014 07:34:18 +0000
Received: from EXHUB01.netplexity.local (172.29.211.21) by
 smtp02.myhostedservice.com (172.29.211.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS)
 id 14.2.347.0; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 02:33:18 -0500
Received: from EXMBX05.netplexity.local ([fe80::cc58:cfe7:ba3b:fae]) by
 exhub01 ([172.29.211.21]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 6 Feb 2014
 02:33:55 -0500
From: Maurice Amsellem <maurice.amsellem@systar.com>
To: "dev@flex.apache.org" <dev@flex.apache.org>
Subject: RE: FLEX-34070
Thread-Topic: FLEX-34070
Thread-Index: AQHPIsX0PfJg2WYhPEivDMO6lGttHpqn02vcgAAAlWA=
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 07:33:55 +0000
Message-ID: 
 <2095F5EBE04D59409DFCE91FFCEBF7AFAF29DD82@EXMBX05.netplexity.local>
References: <A0EAD3CB-73BA-4564-85D9-290CC6C185A7@classsoftware.com>
 <2095F5EBE04D59409DFCE91FFCEBF7AFAF29DBA1@EXMBX05.netplexity.local>
 <52F2C1AE.10901@leeburrows.com>
 <2095F5EBE04D59409DFCE91FFCEBF7AFAF29DBEA@EXMBX05.netplexity.local>
 <52F2C45E.6080201@leeburrows.com> <CF180685.189AE%aharui@adobe.com>
 <7D110730-D0E7-46B3-BD6C-1017AAB7BC66@classsoftware.com>
 <52F2CBFA.6080009@leeburrows.com>
 <F6E2BD5F-E208-46A0-A7B2-4C65C8D1FB8E@classsoftware.com>
 <CF1820CD.189C9%aharui@adobe.com>
 <D0B5E8D5-8792-4FFB-BD05-42336B44409B@classsoftware.com>
 <CF1864F1.189E6%aharui@adobe.com>
 <E527F504-6930-4BF6-A7CA-5DE78A275355@classsoftware.com>
In-Reply-To: <E527F504-6930-4BF6-A7CA-5DE78A275355@classsoftware.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [172.29.211.33]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

>IMO any non binary item in the source release should be under version cont=
rol so we have a history of how it how changed - just because it's generate=
d doesn't mean >you don't want to know how it changed from release to relea=
se - it may not always be directly obvious from the generating template and=
 build scripts.

I don't agree with that.=20
Flex-config.xml changes =3D flex-config-template.xml changes + player versi=
on changes.

So it's rather obvious, it's just that we are not used to that.

Really, I can't see any good reason why a generated file (which is redundan=
t in essence) would be under version control.

Note for Alex:  you can use $git auf <filename> to exclude a file from git =
checkout even if not in .gitignore (thanks to Fred for the tip).

Maurice

-----Message d'origine-----
De=A0: Justin Mclean [mailto:justin@classsoftware.com]=20
Envoy=E9=A0: jeudi 6 f=E9vrier 2014 08:24
=C0=A0: dev@flex.apache.org
Objet=A0: Re: FLEX-34070

Hi,

> Aren't all four generated?  If so, I'm still not understanding why we=20
> call them source and have them under version control if
They are part of the source and binary release zips/tar. I guess another op=
tion is to not have these files at all in the releases then there also no c=
hance they will be incorrect.

IMO any non binary item in the source release should be under version contr=
ol so we have a history of how it how changed - just because it's generated=
 doesn't mean you don't want to know how it changed from release to release=
 - it may not always be directly obvious from the generating template and b=
uild scripts.

> The diff on these four files shows an updated build number in=20
> flex-sdk-description.  How is it that you don't also show this file as=20
> modified?
Because it gets checked in before the release is tagged.

Again you could accidentally make a release with "0" as the build number (q=
uite easy to do/seen quite a few time - not 100% why it happens) so best IM=
O to have this file under version control.

Thanks,
Justin