[texworks] minor problem of getSvnRev.sh
kohda at pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp
Wed Aug 24 15:18:03 CEST 2011
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 10:06:59 +0200, Stefan Löffler wrote:
> Yes, they can be. For one thing, if the committer forgets to run
> getSvnRev, the are off, of course (but that rarely happens).
> The much more likely (and common) explanation is that the svn is not
> only used to track the sources, but also the web page, the manual, and
> all GC wiki pages. Therefore, if some changes are made to any of these,
> the svn revision is bumped, but there were no code changes.
> Now, it's essentially a matter of policy whether to use the revision
> where the sources were last changed, or the HEAD svn revision.
> Personally, I prefer to use the revision the sources were changed,
> because that allows me to see if a rebuild is necessary (e.g., Charlie
> Sharpsteen recently merged his CMake build rules from git, which
> resulted in a hundred or so new revisions, but without touching existing
> code). Plus, it doesn't require running getSvnRev. But if you want to
> stick with the HEAD revision, that's fine with me of course (now that
> getSvnRev hopefully works).
Thanks for your clear explanation. I don't stick with any
revision but I think it is better if there is revision number
(or something similar) with which we can identify source trees
of Tw uniquely.
I'm afraid it could happen that RedHat provides Tw package
with rev.931 and Debian provides Tw package with rev.930 but,
in really, they are built from the same source trees.
As a package maintainer, I think this is not desirable
but not a big problem.
Best regards, 2011-8-24(Wed)
Debian Developer - much more I18N of Debian
Atsuhito Kohda <kohda AT debian.org>
Department of Math., Univ. of Tokushima
More information about the texworks