I'd like to submit the attached diff to be committed.  There are 3 changes:

1. Fix problem with /draco.core/scc/SvnLogParser.cs causing an extra
revision to be included in the changes.

2. Fix problem with /draco.core/runtime/BuildRunner.cs checking the
LastSuccessfulBuildTime instead of the LastModificationTime.  This was
causing Draco to keep trying to build the same code over and over and over
again after a failed build.

3. Add code in /service/modifications.xsl to output Yes/No for Build Success
instead of true/false.

Thanks,
Eric J. Smith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:draconet-users-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erv Walter
> Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 2:46 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; draconet-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Draconet-users] Issues with 1.6 beta
> 
> The first problem is caused by an "off by one" error in the log parser for
> SVN.  I fixed this by changing this line of code in SvnLogParser.cs (note
> the <= instead of just <):
> 
> // HACK: necessary since svn log always gives you the revisions INCLUSIVE
> if ( date < sinceDate )
>       continue;
> 
> to look like this:
> 
> // HACK: necessary since svn log always gives you the revisions INCLUSIVE
> if ( date <= sinceDate )
>       continue;
> 
> I have not seen the second problem, but it may be related to the first
> problem as well.
> 
> We use draco with CVS also and I can say that the second problem does not
> happen with CVS, so it is probably not a feature built into draco (to keep
> rebuilding over and over).
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:draconet-users-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric J. Smith
> Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 8:13 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Draconet-users] Issues with 1.6 beta
> 
> First, I'd like to say thank you for an awesome application!!  I have a
> couple issues I'm hoping will be resolved for the final 1.6 release.
> 
> Whenever I commit a revision to Subversion Draco starts a build, the build
> succeeds, but in the email that I get the "Modifications Since Last Build"
> lists the last two commits even though the second revision was already
> included in the last build.  So basically, it's always including one extra
> revision than it should.
> 
> Also, when a build fails, shouldn't it just wait for another commit before
> trying to build again?  Right now it just keeps trying to build the same
> code over and over and over and over.  If it failed the first time,
> chances
> are that until there is something new to compile, it won't succeed.
> 
> Thanks,
> Eric J. Smith
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> Deadline: Sept. 13. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> _______________________________________________
> Draconet-users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/draconet-users
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> Deadline: Sept. 13. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> _______________________________________________
> Draconet-users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/draconet-users




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
_______________________________________________
Draconet-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/draconet-users

Reply via email to