(Changing subject to something more on-topic) "Ketrenos, James P" <james.p.ketre...@intel.com> writes: > On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Caio Marcelo de Oliveira Filho < > caio.olive...@intel.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 11:09:59PM +0300, Raphael Kubo da Costa wrote: >> > While this is technically possible, it goes in the opposite direction of >> > what we've been doing so far and what we've agreed upon: > > When requirements for the automated Canary build system were originally > discussed, it was indicated that if the build for a platform fails, that > platform won't have a Canary release that day. If that changed, I wasn't > aware of it.
Sigh, apparently this is something I discussed in private with Alexis, so I apologize if you weren't aware of it. So your suggestion for the long-term is to bump the versions in the repository and publish canaries if at least one of the platforms builds succesfully, right? For example, there could be no crosswalk-1.29.25.0.zip for Android even if crosswalk-1.29.25.0-0-i586.rpm was published and the version files in the crosswalk repository say it is at 1.29.25.0. _______________________________________________ Crosswalk-dev mailing list Crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev
