On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 01:21:28PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:46:27AM -0700, Will Yardley wrote: > > Just wondering if folks think it would be desirable to make the date > > string in the build version configurable. I am not a big security > > through obscurity fan, but I just find it messy looking to have the date > > there. > > I don't feel strongly about the date being there. How do the other > developers feel about just removing the date?
It was put there for a reason, and I think for people running dev builds, maybe it's useful to have a date or Mercurial revision hash there. I'm wondering if it's possible to have just a fixed version string when someone's building from a "release", though; at that point, the date becomes kind of pointless (that is, Mutt 1.5.24 release should always be from the same date anyway). That is, if you're running Mutt 6.0.1, it should just say "Mutt/6.0.1" or "Mutt/6.0.1-Release", and if you have a nightly build or build from hg, it could say "Mutt/6.0.1+20160329" or "Mutt/6.0.1+47aeb87ce9cd" or something. w
