Am Samstag, den 28.10.2017, 00:40 +0200 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: > Peter Kovacs wrote: > > I hope I did not scare anyone with this lengthy explanation now. > > No, but it is just off-topic. This is partially my fault since > "Managing > branches" in the subject could be read as a proposal for a branching > model. But this is totally not the topic here. I am not objecting it. > > The issue here is very simple and unrelated to the branching model. > The > issue is: if you want a release to be named "4.1.4" you have to > update > dozens of files to get it done properly, it is not a one-line change > to > set "VERSION = 4.1.4" as some would expect. This is stupid, should > be > scripted, caused two rebuilds of binaries in 4.1.4 due to > distraction. We have a lots of convenieance Programming antipatterns in the code. I dont like those, because to me they are very much unconvenient. This should be handled by the build system. > > If we have to release 4.1.5 (not foreseen at the moment) we will want > to > spend our time in actually fixing the bugs, and not in the painful > update of release numbers here and there. If we do it now, and maybe > take the occasion for scripting it, we won't risk useless delays. > > This is all I wanted to say, and I hope it's clear now. > > We could go on for ages discussing branching models, but the point > of > this thread was actually to address the problem with actually > changing > release numbers in code, nothing else. It does not adress the problem with release models. It works only around them. Is there a bug report for the Problem? > > Regards, > Andrea. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
