>>Now it simply says "6.2b1 - trunk". It would be useful if it >> could report the date that the nightly was built instead, so we have >> something better to report on. > >Build number is actually far more accurate than date, if it can be fixed to >work >reliably. Date wouldn't be applicable for those users not downloading an >actual build, and there are often several 'build numbers' skipped between >nightly builds; they actually correspond to the subversion change number.
I think you misunderstood what I was saying ;-) The nightly SlimServer that I installed a couple of days ago is only reporting "6.2b1 - trunk" - my point was that there wasn't a build number or date to report on. Also, the one before that was reporting 3774, which was apparently wrong for the version I had installed. Maybe there was an installation problem, as I usually only install over the top, rather than uinstall the previous first. As I wasn't trusting the build version, I was reporting the datestamp in the nightly. After installing a few nightlies, I may get confused which nightly I have actually got installed, so I think it would be nice to have both the nightly release date and build number reported. After all, a build number doesn't mean much to end users (good for the developers), whereas the date is useful to the user as a check that the build has installed correctly. Phil _______________________________________________ beta mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/beta
