Michael Brand <michael.ch.br...@gmail.com> writes: > Is it possible with your current "make info" to get an info file > without git describe for a release like ELPA when made from within a > git repo
Why should the git-describe info not be part of the ELPA tarball? If there is a good reason not to include it (I think it is useful to know which commit the ELPA archive was built on) one could alter the include file before rolling the tar ball of course. > and also for Emacs when building Emacs from a bzr-mirroring > git repo? Emacs does have its own build system. So there's be two possibilities: a) just copy over git-decribe.texi as is or b) alter it and put in any information that's deemed more appropriate before it gets copied over to bzr. It might even be useful to actually include the information back into the org.texi file to have a single file. Once it is decided how this should be handled, it can all become part of the makefile of course. Please note that the name "git-describe.texi" is only a suggestion and should probably be changed later on to something like "version.texi". >> Anyway, I've implemented the requested functionality into my Makefile >> fork, please test. > > Thank you for this implementation. Since my patch discussed here is > now superseded by your branch I thought it would be cleaner to put my > comments to the sub-thread "Makefile restructuring" starting here: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2011-07/msg00680.html Thank you. Regards, Achim. -- +<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+ Factory and User Sound Singles for Waldorf Q+, Q and microQ: http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSounds
