On May 3, 2012, at 8:22 AM, Pavel Krivanek wrote: > Why not to have both :-) >
yes, we should do that. > -- Pavel > > > > 3.5.2012 v 5:05, Serge Stinckwich <[email protected]>: > >> When you download a lot of images every week, this is nice to have a >> build number in order to recognize them. >> Regards, >> >> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:20 AM, Francisco Garau >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> How about Jenkins putting a build suffix to the images? -- something like >>> Pharo-2.0.build-20040.image >>> >>> At the moment, all the build generate files with the same name. >>> >>> https://ci.lille.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-2.0/41/ >>> >>> 2.0 #20040 >>> >>> Pharo-2.0.changes 13069724 >>> Pharo-2.0.image 18732936 >>> Pharo-2.0-one-click.zip 19242637 >>> Pharo-2.0.zip 14962904 >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Serge Stinckwich >> UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC), Hanoi, Vietnam >> Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk >> http://doesnotunderstand.org/ >> > -- Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de
