Patrick - It looks like svnversion doesn't work quite as I expected when I made this change before.... anyway, as of 984522 this should now be working as I intended.
Thanks, Rick On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Rick Curtis <[email protected]> wrote: > Yep, sounds like I didn't narrow the scope of this message enough. > > I don't like the idea of having the manually increment a value in > PCEnhancer anytime the file is changed because I think it'll fall to the > wayside pretty quickly. I wonder if I could change the revision from the > openjpa-parent revision to the revision of the PCEnhancer file.? This way > we'll only log a message if the PCEnhancer is really updated. This still may > log a few false positive messages, but it will be closer to the intent of my > original change. > > If that sounds reasonable I'll give it a shot in the am to see if that'll > squash some of those messages. > > Thanks, > Rick > > > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Patrick Linskey <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm getting warnings most of the time that I run my build complaining >> about down-level entities. Are we maybe logging this too eagerly? >> >> Right now, it looks like every time that a new OpenJPA build is created, >> we record different enhancement values in the entities. Since I'm using >> 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT, that means that if I don't do a clean build every day, I see >> messages about down-level entities. I think that this level of logging is >> useful, but changes to the enhancement contract are very rare indeed. It >> seems like we should just increment something deliberately when such a >> contractual change happens, rather than using the svn revision information >> as a proxy for it. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> -Patrick >> >> -- >> Patrick Linskey >> 202 669 5907 >> >> >
