On 7/8/15 12:05 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On Wed 2015-07-08 14:41:10 -0400, Doug Barton wrote:I could see the git Id useful for both releases and dailies. For dailies however if I want to know "On what date was this built?" I'd rather see the date than have to cross-reference it with a commit Id.but why do you want to know "on what date was this built?"
There are any number of answers to that question ... it's not clear to me why you're resistant to the idea of putting the build date in the dailies.
-- is it so you can decide which of two versions to run (you want the more recent one)? or because you want to know what code went into it? if it's just "i want the more recent one" then a git commit id coupled with a commit count from the last tag would be another approach (this is how gnupg betas are counted -- beta414 would be built from the 414th commit since the last official version.
Even assuming that "I want the more recent one" is the answer, your method still requires a cross-reference to git. I'm simply suggesting that the date be available directly instead.
Please try to think of this from the perspective of the above-average user who wants to run a daily, but doesn't need or want to deal with git. I realize that you are very familiar with it, but it shouldn't be a requirement.
Doug --I am conducting an experiment in the efficacy of PGP/MIME signatures. This message should be signed. If it is not, or the signature does not validate, please let me know how you received this message (direct, or to a list) and the mail software you use. Thanks!
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ enigmail-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe or make changes to your subscription click here: https://admin.hostpoint.ch/mailman/listinfo/enigmail-users_enigmail.net
