Re: [Audacity-devel] Naming of rcs (in About Dialog)
A free multi-track audio editor and recorder
Brought to you by:
aosiniao
From: Gale A. <ga...@au...> - 2010-03-30 10:01:07
|
| From Al Dimond <bus...@gm...> | Mon, 29 Mar 2010 21:21:04 -0600 | Subject: [Audacity-devel] Naming of rcs (in About Dialog) > On Monday 29 March 2010 20:03:22 Gale Andrews wrote: > > I note that thanks to __TDATE__ we do actually have the "Program > > Build Date" on the "Build Information" tab of "About", so > > theoretically we could identify if the user had an rc. However the > > build date is misleading for rc4 this time around because it says > > "March 25th", when it can't have been. Was this because the build > > directory wasn't deleted before build? I think it's a good idea to > > do that, as per: > > http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Release_Process/Win > > > > I indeed did not delete the build directory between building RC3 and > RC4. Anything that compiles AboutDialog.cpp will reset the date... so > I guess I should find a decent Windows analog for "touch". > > It seems to me to be a lot less risky to *not* delete the build > directory, at least between RCs. There's a much bigger chance that I'm > going to screw up copying files with funny names around than that VS > will fail to rebuild objects that need to be rebuilt, or whatever else > is supposed to be risky about not deleting it (there's no rationale > given on the Wiki, so I'm not sure what the risk is supposed to be). > Carefully putting the build directory together once per actual release > seems about right to me. I've long been in the habit of deleting the build directory for the Windows "Nightly", purely so I can get the correct build date in the front page of "About". As to "rationale", all I can say anecdotally is that I can recall a couple of occasions when changes that should have appeared in Audacity after compiling simply did not appear when I built into the existing directory. They did appear after doing "clean solution" and getting rid of the build directory. > I am not opposed to doing an extra build, exactly like the last RC but > with the name changed, in the future. Seems kind to users. That's still my view on balance - "About" corresponds to the filename. I raised it because Steve raised it on the Forum. It is more work for the volunteer doing the release and I do see the objections. Gale |