[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Final Release Build
|
David,
I guess the complication stems from our initial misunderstanding of "final build" in the Helios release schedule; we expected to be able to run and contribute our "release" build next week (even if it were based on the same CVS timestamp). I believe others had similar (or perhaps even greater) expectations, so we're not alone there.
We've already identified the need for a "rename" operation (or something similar) for Buckminster builds, but I'm not sure if there is a bug for it yet; if there isn't, I'll create one and add you to the CC list.
What do other projects do? Does "renaming" for other projects involve unpacking zips/JARs, updating identifiers and/or paths, and then repacking/resigning them? Or do folks simply republish their existing bits as new repositories and ZIP archives? I would think the former, unless, for example, folks expect something like "I20100603-1500" to be the build identifier of the official release....
Kenn
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 3:09 PM, David M Williams
<david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> the feature
numbers change with each build because the build identifiers change
Interesting. Complicated. I know there
are plenty of issues of when to call a build "different".
Thanks for letting us know what to expect:
to see changes in build files and that
your final build will change qualifiers of features and branding bundles,
in order to be named correctly. If anything
substantial changes I'm sure you'll let us know.
But sounds like you will _require_ a
rebuild/spin/push of all of Helios's 1,000,000,000 bytes to accommodate
your build system and make sure
everything matches. (did I do that math
right? 1 to 2 Gigabytes, depending on how you count).
Is there a bug/feature request for handling
renames with Buckminster based builds? Sounds important (that is, it would
be best to produce
final bits/versions early and then later
decide those were indeed the bits to release, without having to rebuild).
I'd like to follow that discussion.
[And, honestly, sounds like you could
have planned better ... how do you know your "final rebuild to change
the name and URLs" is really the right one to release? that nothing
broke?]
We are here to help! :)
Well, in the case of the EMF, XSD, and Ecore Tools builds,
the feature numbers change with each build because the build identifiers,
which are stored in the about.mappings files of the branding bundles, change.
But the other (i.e., source code) bits would remain the same. Is this acceptable?
Kenn
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 12:53 PM, David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Well ... let's see ... does it set office furniture on fire? :) Just kidding.
Yes, if just the URL of the final repo changes, and all feature/bundle
versions stay the same, I won't complain.
If some version number change (even if in qualifier only) I'd appreciate
understanding why that was ... since that implies different bits.
Thanks,
I think what Ed means is that some projects need to respin their builds
(against the same bits) using a different build type (e.g., "R"
instead of "I") and those builds need to be published to a different
repository location (release repo instead of milestones repo) before the
final release. I assume such projects should be considered exceptions so
that they are picked up by a final "on demand" aggregation?
Kenn
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:06 AM, David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Not sure. And, not sure I know what you mean. Normally when I hear "rename"
it just involve zip files and directory names. Do you mean the directory
part of the URL in the .build file? In the past, people have just corrected
those to final location (after the release, normally) and does not require
a respin. This is not ideal, obviously, since we are not literally building
from the final URL, but, honestly, we always have the risk that the contents
of a URL changes and breaks the build, or makes it non-reproducible.
If I've not answered what you need to know, please ask again.
Thanks,
David,
Given that we don't have rename support for our Buckminster builds, how
will be spin and contribute our final release build?
Regards,
Ed
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
