Well, he could build it, but he could delete the builds from the server when m2 appeared *or* he could mark the directory by adding a label like "NOTAPPROVED" or "PLEASESKIP" or "OBSOLETE" or "UNUSABLE" or whatever. But he has every right in this universe to build these builds. Maybe just some labeling is missing to make a non-knowledgeable user better acquainted with what he or she is downloading (especially if it becomes well known among developers that a build is unusable or even harmful).
Once again, Maho and Pavel, thanks for the services you provide to this community, we need your work! Lp, m. On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 4:33 AM, James McKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > eric b wrote: >> >> Hi, >> Le 30 juin 08 à 02:20, Maho NAKATA a écrit : >> >>> >>>> This is plain wrong. My post is only a suggestion about take care to >>>> provide "agreed" builds, in cooperation with the mac porters. >>> >>> This is plain wrong. Mac team should fix them and integrate to the master >>> ASAP. >>> >> >> Yet another time : the crashes are fixed, but not integrated, and it would >> be nice to not provide public builds wating they are. >> > Eric, other fixes are build into the milestones. If we can get the instant > crash fixed, we need to look at them and make sure nothing else is broken in > the Mac OS X builds. This means that we will still need the continuous > builds. However, BEB300_m1 and BEB300_m2 were just one day apart. Thus, > Maho should be told not to build m1, and that should come from Hamburg, not > us. > > James McKenzie > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
