I pushed the change to gitbox trunk. On 15.08.19 00:15, Kay Schenk wrote: > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:07 PM Matthias Seidel <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> > wrote: > >> Hi Kay, >> >> Am 15.08.19 um 00:02 schrieb Kay Schenk: >>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:24 PM Marcus <marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote: >>> >>>> Am 14.08.19 um 22:02 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>>>>> On Aug 14, 2019, at 10:51 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote: >>>>>>> We already have the build id, the build >>>>>>> date and now the git hash (which is a unique link to the last commit >> it >>>>>>> was based on) >>>>>>> This is how we did it with SVN, why should we change it? >>>>>> Because we are dropping information. The SVN revisions are always >>>> increasing, and thus (independent on the build date, which can be at any >>>> moment) I can compare two builds and retain information on which came >> first. >>>>>> With git of course this doesn't hold, i.e., you cannot say which >> commit >>>> came earlier between abcd1234 and 5678abcd. So I see some added value >> if we >>>> enrich it this way. >>>>> Is that needed though? I had thought the basic reason for having the >> SVN >>>> ID is that the end-user knows, for sure, which SVN revision their app >> was >>>> built from. >>>> >>>> it's unrealistic that the commit was done, e.g., today but the build >>>> weeks later. So, Git hash and build date is not done at the exact same >>>> date and time. But nearly. And here it think it's sufficiant. >>>> >>>> But when we decide to prefix the hash with a date value it's OK for me, >>>> too. >>>> >>>> Marcus >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>>> >>>> >>> I think the date and hash should be displayed in the "build information" >>> screen as the revision information was previously. In Jim's sample >> display, >>> although the date is displayed, there is no indication of actual >> "revision" >>> (hash). >> This is simply because the code we are discussing about is still not >> committed. >> >> I applied Peters patch and it looks like this: >> >> >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/tkal1y9b09vrhse/VirtualBox_Windows%2010%20AOO-Build_14_08_2019_16_14_33.png?dl=0 >> >> Matthias >> > OK. Good. > >>
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
