Re: [Evolution-hackers] SVN issues

2007-09-21 Thread Jules Colding
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.
   * 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.
   * 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.

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...

puzzled,
  jules

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


Re: [Evolution-hackers] SVN issues

2007-09-21 Thread Jules Colding
On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 13:10 +0530, Veerapuram Varadhan 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.
 * 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.
 * 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.
  
  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...
  
 Certain instances make us believe somethings to be true, but, they are
 necessarily not.  
 
  puzzled,
 
 When kisses and misses happen, they leave us puzzled. ;-)

;-)


 Will be fixed shortly and thanks for bringing it out. 

Thanks,
  jules



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


Re: [Evolution-hackers] SVN issues

2007-09-21 Thread Jules Colding
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