[ros-general] Re: [ros-dev] Why??

[TwoTailedFox]

I would imagine the Build Number is added by the Compiler.

On 12/18/05, David Hinz <post.center at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, I was just talking about these 4 digits, the individual build
> number, I never noticed the other numbers.
>
> TwoTailedFox schrieb:
> > The Build Numbers in Windows XP arn't nonsense.
> >
> > 2600 is the Individual Build Number. The first set of six numbers is
> > the date the build was compiled on, written in yy/mm/dd format. The
> > final set of four numbers are the time that the compile finished,
> > written in 24 Hour Time Format.
> >
> > On 12/18/05, David Hinz <post.center at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Well, I'm fine with it, but some other people seem to have problems with
> >> this system, so I thought of something without any sense, just numbers.
> >>
> >> Like the build-numbers every MS-product has, e.g. Win XP has the
> >> build-number 2600
> >>
> >> I would be more for a mix of a lot of different systems.
> >>
> >> Create daily technology preview, that don't need to be "perfect", if
> >> they compile fine, they can be released. This would be the ones with the
> >> buildnumbers.
> >> Then there were monthly releases, or maybe a release every month with
> >> the current numbering system, but also with buildnumbers.
> >>
> >> And then we have the releases with codenames.
> >>
> >> So as an example this all could look like this:
> >>
> >> 02.01.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0001 r20500
> >> 09.01.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0002 r20619
> >> 16.01.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0003 r20681
> >> 23.01.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0004 r20834
> >> 30.01.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0005 r21001
> >> ...
> >> 20.02.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0008 r21517
> >> 27.02.2006: Release 0.2.10: Build 0009 r21687
> >> 06.03.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0010 r21755
> >> ...
> >> ...
> >> 17.04.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0016 r22033
> >> 24.04.2006: Release 0.3.0: Build 0017 r22177 Codename God knows
> >> 01.05.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0018 r22257
> >>
> >> You see, I would choose a weekly release plan.
> >>
> >> The whole organisation on SVN would look a bit like this:
> >>
> >> We have trunk, which would be our unstable tree.
> >> Then we have our testing tree, which always has to compile fine and
> >> should at least boot and install fine too.
> >> This branch would be feature freezed for one day every week, and after
> >> this the Technology Preview would be released.
> >> In addition, the ordinary two monthly releases would be created out of
> >> this branch, we would just feature freeze it for a whole week and the
> >> last 3 days of the week it would be codefreezed, so on the whole it
> >> would be feature freezed for 8 days (including the one day before the
> >> last Technology Preview) and of this 8 days it would be code freezed for
> >> 3 days (the last 3 days before the release).
> >> So an ordinary release would be a Technology Preview, but in the week
> >> before its release the branch would be handled a bit differently than in
> >> other weeks.
> >>
> >> I hope I didn't confuse you all too much, but for me this seems like a
> >> good idea.
> >>
> >> Comments are highly appreciated.
> >>
> >> Greets,
> >>
> >> David Hinz
> _______________________________________________
> ros-general mailing list
> ros-general at reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
>


--
"I had a handle on life, but then it broke"