Re: [Libreoffice] Naming builds. Please???

Hi again Andras

> We have 5 repositories now: core, binfilter, dictionaries, help, and
> translations. Therefore there are 5 git commit IDs in the About box
> separated by dashes. These are good identifiers of the build, at least
> these uniquely identify the source code that the build was made from.
> Of course the outcome of build  process depends on the configure
> switches, too. Maybe we should hack something in like
> about:buildconfig in Firefox.
>
> When you see the full build log of
> master~2011-12-02_22.36.35_libodev35.exe, you will see the git commit
> IDs there, but I agree that it is hard to find.

Interesting information about the 5 code blocks. The problem is: if
someone doesn't use the 5 repositories then the build ID only has e.g.
3 blocks like in
master~2011-12-02_22.36.35_libodev35.exe where Kendy only used core,
dictionaries and help
So the About box says a286353-090bcba-3bf3b94
which I just realized are the 7 first letters of each used repository commit ID

tinderbox: git sha1s
core:a28635374613e556a0093c242823ea90a3704f74
dictionaries:090bcbaa55370d7906b0cab08839fe88f4e80215
help:3bf3b943ff05fda627498426a23f94cd0e0b7aab

(The above four lines were extracted from
master~2011-12-02_22.36.35_build_info.txt which is a separate
download, not included in the msi file.)

Shouldn't it have all five blocks in the same order and just display #
(or some other character for those not used), as in
a286353-#-090bcba-3bf3b94-# (since it lacks binfilter and
translations)?

So the information is indeed all there, but this is not user friendly at all :)

> No, build numbers do not bump at each commit, they are bumped before
> releases (beta, rc). 4f11d0a is the commit ID that git produces. It is
> not in the source code.

So, 4f11d0a is a global commit ID calculated from the partial 5 git
commit IDs? And obviously this only makes sense when the 5
repositories are used, which is not mandatory for any build...

I think this makes QA work in any master build pointless. QA must then
be restricted to official Betas but then there needs to be more
coordination and time between Beta0 and the public Beta1 (unless TDF
is not worried about the quality and image that a  Public Beta
conveys).

Thank you again for the excellent explanation, Andras ;)

Best regards,
Pedro