[Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-qa] Java 7 support in LO 3.4.5 (was: minutes of tech. steering call ...)

Bjoern Michaelsen bjoern.michaelsen at canonical.com
Fri Dec 9 15:04:36 PST 2011


On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 11:36:47PM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> So, really, rather than "time at which the tinderbox pulled", I argue
> that "recorded commit time of the HEAD node" is a better identifier to
> put in tarball names, about boxes, etc. It is really (within a
> branch) a proper global version number, à la SVN revision.

Timesstamps are _not_ a valid reference to a source tree or order in DSCM.(*)
Never. Not even on Sunday in moonlight.

The only valid reference is the commit-id. IMHO this should really end the
discussion right here.

However, one consession that I think would be acceptable would be to make the
commit-id in the about box a direct link to our cgit e.g.:


After all, this is about development builds so we do not have to worry if these
links become invalid some day in the far future if we change our



(*) These timestamps are set locally on developer machines, which can their
    local time totally fubared. Using timestamps for this is nonsense.

More information about the LibreOffice mailing list