CCNET-1828: SVN TagOnSuccess working copy

90 views
Skip to first unread message

mcdon

unread,
Mar 7, 2010, 5:09:15 AM3/7/10
to ccnet-devel
I think it would be useful to have an option for TagOnSuccess to
always use the working copy when creating a tag. I use the value of
CCNetLabel to update my AssemblyInfo.cs files with a new version
number during a build. When creating a tag I would like the tag to
include the version number that was generated at that time. Normally
you must use forcebuild to tag your working copy.

I'll post a patch "CCNET-1828" that adds the option to Svn.cs, along
with a unit test. I also posted it on Jira http://jira.public.thoughtworks.org/browse/CCNET-1828

mcdon

unread,
Apr 9, 2010, 6:51:56 PM4/9/10
to ccnet-devel
I found a bug in the first patch I posted at
http://jira.public.thoughtworks.org/browse/CCNET-1828, and uploaded a
new patch TagWorkingCopyV2.patch.

Here's a description of the problem this patch is meant to address:
When you use CruiseControl.net to generate a version number, then
update the AssemblyInfo.cs files, the version number is not saved as
part of the tag.

With this patch when you use TagOnSuccess=true and TagWorkingCopy=true
the new version number will be saved in AssemblyInfo.cs as part of the
tag.
This would make the build repeatable down to the version number it
used when CruiseControl.net generated the tag.

mcdon

unread,
Apr 12, 2010, 9:32:30 AM4/12/10
to ccnet-devel
On ccnet-devel I uploaded CCNET-1828-V2.patch. Please review this
patch and consider applying it to CCNET. The patch would allow you to
save the version number CCNET generates when it creates a tag. If you
check out tag v1.2.3.4 and run the build, the files build would be
version 1.2.3.4 rather than 0.0.0.0 or 1.0.0.0.

On Apr 9, 5:51 pm, mcdon <mcdon....@gmail.com> wrote:
> I found a bug in the first patch I posted athttp://jira.public.thoughtworks.org/browse/CCNET-1828, and uploaded a

Ruben Willems

unread,
Apr 12, 2010, 9:41:08 AM4/12/10
to ccnet...@googlegroups.com
Hi

we're close to the 1.5 release,
so I would ask to other devs if they want  it in the 1.5 branch or the trunk only?

I vote the trunk only, unless someone would like to test it very good in a production environment.
Do not want to break something this near to the release.


with kind regards
Ruben Willems

--
To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages