On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Hans Hagen <pra...@wxs.nl> wrote: > On 10/1/2013 11:26 AM, Hans Hagen wrote: > >> On 10/1/2013 11:19 AM, Taco Hoekwater wrote: >> >>> On 10/01/2013 11:11 AM, Hans Hagen wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> as long as we keep the (unique) date in the luatex banner ... context >>>> uses that for automatically regenerating the format etc and that's a >>>> feature I'd not like to see go awa >>>> >>> >>> Does it matter to you whether it is an actual date string, or could it >>> be a subversion revision number? (both are possible, the date string >>> would simply switch to the datetime associated with the subversion >>> revision instead of the actual build date). >>> >> >> (to be clear: i don't use the primitive, just the banner, so the >> primitive can go anyway) >> > > we could have > > luatex 0.77.0 (rev xxxx) (date ....) > > (beta- prefix not needed) > > and any piece of the workflow could ignore whatever bit they like and/or > the date part could be omitted for stable releases > > +1
I understand the problem of triggering useless compilation due the change in the date only, but I think that it's easily solvable by an adequate parse of the banner that saves only the components needed. -- luigi
_______________________________________________ dev-luatex mailing list dev-luatex@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/dev-luatex
