Hi Linus,
Unfortunately, the windows installer creates shortcuts and some of the
installer text using the parameter passed to it during the build script.
This means that even though the executable has been renamed, the installer
still makes out that it is installing 0.26.1_BETA_1.
This isn't really a big deal if 0.26.2 is going to be released in the next
few days.
Regards,
Dave
Linus Tolke wrote:
Thanks to Toms insisting on taking some shortcuts ;-), the release
0.26.1 as a copy of the release 0.26.1.beta1 is now uploaded. I made it
available only from the http://argouml-downloads.tigris.org/devrel.html
web page.
If we will proceed to 0.26.2 including the fix to issue 5434 shortly
(next couple of days) we should perhaps not promote release 0.26.1 but
instead promote 0.26.2 once completed.
I have now merged the patch into the release branch for 0.26.* releases.
I have also prepared the release scripts so that I easily can create the
0.26.2 release without any manual tagging. With this I am ready to press
the button for either a 0.26.2.beta1 release or a 0.26.2 release
including the fix to 5434. Shall I plan that for tomorrow evening?
/Linus
2008/11/18 Linus Tolke <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
Yes, it doesn't have to be rebuilt. It is just the naming of the
zip, tar, and java web start files that needs to be updated. I will
do that instead of firing of the build script. I think it will be
quicker.
I will also create the release tag from the VERSION_0_26_1_BETA_1
tag instead of from the branches/BRANCH_0_26_x tag.
/Linus
2008/11/18 Tom Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Linus Tolke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> This means that I should make a release 0.26.1 as soon as
possible with the
> exact same contents as 0.26.1.beta1.
If the contents are the same and it's already (mis)labelled 0.26.1,
why does anything need to be done except move it to the release
page?
If the kit really does need to be re-built, there needs to be an
easily identifiable way to distinguish it from previous build (ie it
can't have the same version string).
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Christian López Espínola
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> So issue 5434 should be in a new stable release soon. Are
there any
> other issues that people wants to see in?
>
> I'd advocate the idea of doing a stable release (0.26.1) with the
> contents of 0.26.1-beta (AKA 0.26.1).
> We can then follow with other minor releases carefully if it
is needed.
I think the priority should be distributing as soon as feasible the
fix for issue 5434 and any other problems which are corrupting
peoples
projects or preventing them from opening them (I think there was a
profile issue fix included in 0.26.1). If releasing 0.26.1,
To clarify the impact of issue 5434, it will corrupt any file
containing non-USASCII characters. That includes not only all
ideographic character sets (Chinese, Japanese, Korean), but accented
Western European characters, Greek, Arabic, etc, etc. This will
happen the first time a project is saved and will affect both new
projects and those upgraded from earlier versions of ArgoUML. If
you're lucky, it'll just change the characters into something else,
but most of the time it will corrupt the project in a way which
makes
it unreadable.
Tom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
