On 05/11/2008, Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 00:32 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
> > Yes: is there any reason to not do it?
>
>
> It does not look actually useful, and I could forget about it (meaning a
> lot of wasted time).
Perhaps you could do something like we
On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 00:32 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
> Yes: is there any reason to not do it?
It does not look actually useful, and I could forget about it (meaning a
lot of wasted time).
Rémy
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
Remy Maucherat schrieb:
> On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 00:09 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
>> I propose, that we start to increment the version number in
>> build.properties.default as part of the release process before tagging.
>
> I propose that I won't do it.
There's no need for you to do it. Anyone can
On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 00:09 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
> I propose, that we start to increment the version number in
> build.properties.default as part of the release process before tagging.
I propose that I won't do it. Any questions ?
Rémy
-
I noticed that our TC 6 source distribution does not contain any version
info (apart from the archive file name).
For TC 5.5 the file build.properties.default gets updated before tagging
with the correct version info, for TC 6 there's alway 6.0.0.0 in it and
6.0-snapshot.
I propose, that we start
