Re: [dsdp-mtj-dev] SR1

[Daniel Pastore <kpqb38@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Gustavo,

Even though there were no code changes, I understand that the version should be update to x.y.z+1 and it should be generated as a maintenance build (x.y.z.M<qualifier>), to comply with the good practices mentioned. :)

On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 16:50, Gustavo Eliano <gustavo.eliano@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

thanks marcel!!!

about pulsar, if the other components were changed (JDT and the
platform), pulsar itself will then be repacked. my question was more
about mtj itself. if there were no changes on mtj since helios, then
the same mtj can be used in pulsar SR1 package and it would not be
necessary to rebuild mtj.

i really don't remember if there were significant changes since the
helios build.

:)
gep

On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Daniel Pastore <kpqb38@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Gustavo,
> I talked with Markus Knauer (from EPP), asking if we needed a new build for
> Pulsar, and he said it was a good practice to do so. :)
> Please let me know if I can help you updating Helios and EPP build files.
>
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 16:37, Gustavo Eliano <gustavo.eliano@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>>
>> does anyone see the need to update the build in the SR1? i don't
>> remember if there were changes since 1.1 release. if ther were, please
>> let me know and i can see how to work on that
>>
>> :)
>> gep
>> _______________________________________________
>> dsdp-mtj-dev mailing list
>> dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-mtj-dev
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> Daniel Pastore
>
> _______________________________________________
> dsdp-mtj-dev mailing list
> dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-mtj-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
dsdp-mtj-dev mailing list
dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-mtj-dev

--
Thanks,

Daniel Pastore