Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index


Hi,

On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 11:36:47PM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
So, really, rather than "time at which the tinderbox pulled", I argue
that "recorded commit time of the HEAD node" is a better identifier to
put in tarball names, about boxes, etc. It is really (within a
branch) a proper global version number, à la SVN revision.

Timesstamps are _not_ a valid reference to a source tree or order in DSCM.(*)
Never. Not even on Sunday in moonlight.

The only valid reference is the commit-id. IMHO this should really end the
discussion right here.

However, one consession that I think would be acceptable would be to make the
commit-id in the about box a direct link to our cgit e.g.:

 http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=1d1f049859e080b403c743f7e0604bd72475a824

After all, this is about development builds so we do not have to worry if these
links become invalid some day in the far future if we change our
infrastructure.

Best,

Bjoern


(*) These timestamps are set locally on developer machines, which can their
    local time totally fubared. Using timestamps for this is nonsense.

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.