From: Earnie B. <ea...@us...> - 2013-09-07 15:29:57
|
Keith, Should the make process copy the modified package-list.xml back to the source directory like it does for the issue.log? It seems like we would want to keep the changed file in repository but you may have a reason not to. -- Earnie -- https://sites.google.com/site/earnieboyd |
From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2013-09-07 19:38:38
|
On 07/09/13 16:29, Earnie Boyd wrote: > Should the make process copy the modified package-list.xml back to > the source directory like it does for the issue.log? No. > It seems like we would want to keep the changed file in repository > but you may have a reason not to. The file stored in the repository is really a template; it doesn't change, (unless we explicitly edit it). The generated .lzma, which we push to FRS, is adjusted at make time, adding date stamps derived from issue.log to the template. We need to keep issue.log in the repository, so we all have a common reference for the date stamps. With that in place, we should be able to reproduce the same generated state for common/package-list.xml.lzma, (and its siblings, in mingw32/mingw32-package-list.xml.lzma, and msys/msys-package-list.xml.lzma, which also carry date stamps). -- Regards, Keith. |