On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 20:46 +0530, Veerapuram Varadhan wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 20:36 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 09:18 +0200, Jules Colding wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2007-09-20 at 15:43 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> > > > Hi all;
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not an evolution developer but I'm trying to understand the way the
> > > > project uses subversion.  I have some questions, especially now that
> > > > there's been a release of 2.12:
> > > > 
> > > >       * Shouldn't there be a gnome-2-20 branch on evolution-webcal?
> > > >         there may be other Evo modules that don't have the right branch.
> > 
> > evolution-webcal module isn't maintained by the Evolution team. I think
> > Rodney (dobey) maintains it.
> > 
> > > >       * I notice that the versions of the code that I'm building still
> > > >         say 2.11.92, rather than 2.12, but I thought that 2.12 was
> > > >         officially released?  I don't see anything on the gnome-2-20
> > > >         branch that changes the version number, which is where you'd
> > > >         expect it to be.
> > Blame it on me. We do have a gnome-2-20 branch and I normally do the
> > tagging and commit of configure, NEWS, ChangeLogs on Wednesday's (Day of
> > release). Unfortunately I'm sick for the past three days and I haven't
> > had a touch of my laptop apart from any emergency emails/issues. Just
> > today I have done it. Sorry for any inconvenience. 
> > 
> > > >       * Are we adding tags to the code to denote the release?  I don't
> > > >         see any tags that seem to be related to this release.
> > > 
> > Yes. We are tagging releases and it is done for 2.12.0 as well. 
> > 
> > > I can only join you in your puzzlement. The following are excepts from
> > > configure.in and shell/Makefile.am:
> > > 
> > > configure.in:
> > >   AC_INIT(evolution, 2.11.92, 
> > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Evolution)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > shell/Makefile.am:
> > >   noinst_PROGRAMS = evolution
> > > 
> > >   install-exec-local: install-evolution
> > >           $(mkinstalldirs) $(DESTDIR)$(libexecdir)
> > >           mv $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/evolution-$(BASE_VERSION) 
> > > $(DESTDIR)$(libexecdir)/evolution-$(BASE_VERSION)
> > >           $(INSTALL_PROGRAM) evolution-nognome 
> > > $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/evolution-$(BASE_VERSION)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > These tree excerpts alone makes me believe that
> > > "svn.gnome.org/svn/evolution/trunk" isn't the primary repository that
> > > the Novell developers checks their source into...
> > 
> > Jules, No we work ONLY with svn.gnome.org and whatever we do are with
> > GNOME SVN only. You may see some small-random patches with OpenSUSE but
> > otherwise there is nothing else hidden here.
> > 
> Even they are not hidden, grab a src rpm and you get everything. ;-)

Yes, yes, I wasn't seriously expecting anything else. I was just puzzled
that 2.12 was out but that svn showed another version.

Best regards,
  jules


_______________________________________________
Evolution-hackers mailing list
Evolution-hackers@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers

Reply via email to