Comments on: Simplifying releases through git http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/ Daniel Hoelbling talks about .NET Sun, 14 Mar 2010 16:22:22 +0100 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Gregory Van de Wiele http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/comment-page-1/#comment-3429 Gregory Van de Wiele Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:22:27 +0000 http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/#comment-3429 That's the best option. I've read MSI's and other installers use the FileVersion, but no clue how exactly... That's the best option. I've read MSI's and other installers use the FileVersion, but no clue how exactly…

]]> By: Daniel Hölbling http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/comment-page-1/#comment-3428 Daniel Hölbling Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:15:46 +0000 http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/#comment-3428 Actually the build script does not commit at all. AssemblyInfo.cs is NOT part of the repository. It gets ignored and therefore there is no need for git-commit. <br>If you make a clean clone of the repo you need to run the buildscript at least once before you can start working, but that's ok. After that whenever you commit and do a subsequent build the AssemblyInfo.cs will get updated to the newest version.. Actually the build script does not commit at all. AssemblyInfo.cs is NOT part of the repository. It gets ignored and therefore there is no need for git-commit.
If you make a clean clone of the repo you need to run the buildscript at least once before you can start working, but that's ok. After that whenever you commit and do a subsequent build the AssemblyInfo.cs will get updated to the newest version..

]]> By: Daniel Hölbling http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/comment-page-1/#comment-3427 Daniel Hölbling Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:14:05 +0000 http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/#comment-3427 I've also seen scripts where you put the hash into the normal version number and disable the warnings you get through some compiler flags. But I decided against it. Still thanks for the tipp, I'll look into it a bit more. I've also seen scripts where you put the hash into the normal version number and disable the warnings you get through some compiler flags. But I decided against it. Still thanks for the tipp, I'll look into it a bit more.

]]> By: Gregory Van de Wiele http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/comment-page-1/#comment-3425 Gregory Van de Wiele Tue, 16 Feb 2010 16:23:06 +0000 http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/#comment-3425 I think you can put the complete hash in the informationalversion, it takes a string. The other version attributes require numbers. I think you can put the complete hash in the informationalversion, it takes a string. The other version attributes require numbers.

]]> By: Gregory Van de Wiele http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/comment-page-1/#comment-3426 Gregory Van de Wiele Tue, 16 Feb 2010 16:17:31 +0000 http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/#comment-3426 When your build script updates the AssemblyInfo.cs files when releasing, doesn't that require an additional GIT commit for the updated AssemblyInfo.cs files? Or does the script do a 'GIT reset --hard' right after releasing and you oonly tag the version in GIT? Or is the build script really doing a GIT commit+ GIT tag for every build? A commit for every build sounds like overkill. I'm still seeking a good balance myself. When your build script updates the AssemblyInfo.cs files when releasing, doesn't that require an additional GIT commit for the updated AssemblyInfo.cs files? Or does the script do a 'GIT reset –hard' right after releasing and you oonly tag the version in GIT? Or is the build script really doing a GIT commit+ GIT tag for every build? A commit for every build sounds like overkill. I'm still seeking a good balance myself.

]]> By: Daniel Hölbling http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/comment-page-1/#comment-3407 Daniel Hölbling Sat, 12 Dec 2009 21:51:03 +0000 http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/#comment-3407 We don't use the hash in the version attribute but only in title and description. <br>The version is just straight from the git tag (like v1.1.0)<br><br>But Ayende adds the hash to the version number in Rhino-Mocks. But he has to disable some compiler warning for that. We don't use the hash in the version attribute but only in title and description.
The version is just straight from the git tag (like v1.1.0)

But Ayende adds the hash to the version number in Rhino-Mocks. But he has to disable some compiler warning for that.

]]> By: Mauricio Scheffer http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/comment-page-1/#comment-3406 Mauricio Scheffer Sat, 12 Dec 2009 21:46:56 +0000 http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/#comment-3406 How are you handling the commit hash? The CLR only admits 16-bit numbers for each version component... How are you handling the commit hash? The CLR only admits 16-bit numbers for each version component…

]]> By: ChrisJOwen http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/comment-page-1/#comment-3384 ChrisJOwen Mon, 02 Nov 2009 02:04:26 +0000 http://www.tigraine.at/2009/10/27/simplifying-releases-through-git/#comment-3384 Ahhh, I understand what you were banging on about now. Skype chat isn't the best way of explaining a coding solution (either that or I wasn't paying attention). Great work on the build script anyway. Ahhh, I understand what you were banging on about now. Skype chat isn't the best way of explaining a coding solution (either that or I wasn't paying attention). Great work on the build script anyway.

]]>