On Wednesday, 6 January 2016 at 16:37:24 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
The remaining issue is that that makes the makefile assume git is installed. Is that reasonable?

I hate to be the one to say this, but I don't think it is reasonable in the packaged release. In the dev version, absolutely, but the packaged release is not a git repository, but still includes the makefile...


However, let's not let the release compromise the development. The release generation script can run git ls-files itself and do some string replacement in the relevant files.

              • ... Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... bachmeier via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... default0 via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... bachmeier via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d-announce
              • ... Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce
  • Re: Better docs for D (WIP... Nordlöw via Digitalmars-d-announce
  • Re: Better docs for D (WIP... Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce

Reply via email to