incubator-flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carol Frampton <cfram...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1418709 - in /incubator/flex/sdk/branches/develop/frameworks/projects: rpc/build.xml spark/build.xml spark_dmv/build.xml
Date Mon, 10 Dec 2012 21:28:22 GMT
That’s done in the top-level build.xml, target is frameworks-rsls, and it
uses build-number="${release.version}.${build.number}" which is the
build.number I was referring to - passed in on the command line for the
release build, defaults to 0 from build.properties.

Carol

On 12/10/12 4 :18PM, "Alex Harui" <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

>I think Justin was worried about the RSL names when creating an RC.  How
>do
>the RSLs get their names? Doesn't the TLF RSL have a different version
>appended to its name?  Don't the other RSLs go from having a .0.0.0 to
>some
>actual version?
>
>
>On 12/10/12 1:07 PM, "Carol Frampton" <cframpto@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> As far as I know the sdk build isn't using the build.number files (the
>> installer has one which is being used).  build.number is a "magic" file
>> which the ant build number task uses.
>> 
>> There is a build.number property in the top-level build.properties file
>> which is overridden with the svn rev for release builds with
>> -Dbuild.number=<svn last changed rev> on the command line of the build.
>> 
>> Carol
>> 
>> On 12/10/12 3 :44PM, "Chema Balsas" <jbalsas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I did a full mustella run over the weekend (it takes my computer over
>>>12
>>> hours...). In an initial pass, I got about 70 errors or so with the
>>>swcs
>>> not including version.properties. Then I reverted the changes and run
>>>the
>>> mustella on the failures getting the same errors, the changes don't
>>>seem
>>> to
>>> introduce any new errors.
>>> 
>>> @Justin Since you were the one to raise concerns about this, does this
>>> look
>>> good to you?
>>> 
>>> To wrap it up, in the other thread Gordon said:
>>> 
>>> I think Adobe's build machines had some scripts that set build.number
>>>to
>>>> the Perforce revision number that it was building.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I assumed this was being used to keep track of the released versions of
>>> some swcs. Can someone on Adobe confirm or further comment on this?
>>>What
>>> strikes me as odd is that only those 3 swcs were including this file.
>>>Is
>>> there some explanation for this, or is this maybe just some code left
>>>from
>>> the donation process?
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Chema
>>> 
>>> 2012/12/8 Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>
>>> 
>>>> There was a discussion in another thread. Maybe I misunderstood.
>>>>Anyway
>>>> develop branch was broken.  Release branch doesn't have this problem.
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my Motorola ATRIX 4G on AT&T
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original message-----
>>>> From: Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>
>>>> To: "flex-dev@incubator.apache.org" <flex-dev@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Sent: Sat, Dec 8, 2012 17:33:55 GMT+00:00
>>>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1418709 - in
>>>> /incubator/flex/sdk/branches/develop/frameworks/projects:
>>>>rpc/build.xml
>>>> spark/build.xml spark_dmv/build.xml
>>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>>> Remove version.properties include-file directive from rpc, spark and
>>>> spark_dmv as conflicts with compile-config.xml and is currently unused
>>>> You might want to double check that it not used in the release build.
>>>>I
>>>> think that the version number is used when generating the RSLs.
>>>> 
>>>> Justin
>>>> 
>> 
>
>-- 
>Alex Harui
>Flex SDK Team
>Adobe Systems, Inc.
>http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>

Mime
View raw message