That’s done in the top-level build.xml, target is frameworks-rsls, and it
uses build-number="${release.version}.${build.number}" which is the
build.number I was referring to - passed in on the command line for the
release build, defaults to 0 from build.properties.Carol On 12/10/12 4 :18PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >I think Justin was worried about the RSL names when creating an RC. How >do >the RSLs get their names? Doesn't the TLF RSL have a different version >appended to its name? Don't the other RSLs go from having a .0.0.0 to >some >actual version? > > >On 12/10/12 1:07 PM, "Carol Frampton" <cfram...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> As far as I know the sdk build isn't using the build.number files (the >> installer has one which is being used). build.number is a "magic" file >> which the ant build number task uses. >> >> There is a build.number property in the top-level build.properties file >> which is overridden with the svn rev for release builds with >> -Dbuild.number=<svn last changed rev> on the command line of the build. >> >> Carol >> >> On 12/10/12 3 :44PM, "Chema Balsas" <jbal...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I did a full mustella run over the weekend (it takes my computer over >>>12 >>> hours...). In an initial pass, I got about 70 errors or so with the >>>swcs >>> not including version.properties. Then I reverted the changes and run >>>the >>> mustella on the failures getting the same errors, the changes don't >>>seem >>> to >>> introduce any new errors. >>> >>> @Justin Since you were the one to raise concerns about this, does this >>> look >>> good to you? >>> >>> To wrap it up, in the other thread Gordon said: >>> >>> I think Adobe's build machines had some scripts that set build.number >>>to >>>> the Perforce revision number that it was building. >>> >>> >>> I assumed this was being used to keep track of the released versions of >>> some swcs. Can someone on Adobe confirm or further comment on this? >>>What >>> strikes me as odd is that only those 3 swcs were including this file. >>>Is >>> there some explanation for this, or is this maybe just some code left >>>from >>> the donation process? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Chema >>> >>> 2012/12/8 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> >>> >>>> There was a discussion in another thread. Maybe I misunderstood. >>>>Anyway >>>> develop branch was broken. Release branch doesn't have this problem. >>>> >>>> Sent from my Motorola ATRIX 4G on AT&T >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original message----- >>>> From: Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> >>>> To: "flex-dev@incubator.apache.org" <flex-dev@incubator.apache.org> >>>> Sent: Sat, Dec 8, 2012 17:33:55 GMT+00:00 >>>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1418709 - in >>>> /incubator/flex/sdk/branches/develop/frameworks/projects: >>>>rpc/build.xml >>>> spark/build.xml spark_dmv/build.xml >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>>> Remove version.properties include-file directive from rpc, spark and >>>> spark_dmv as conflicts with compile-config.xml and is currently unused >>>> You might want to double check that it not used in the release build. >>>>I >>>> think that the version number is used when generating the RSLs. >>>> >>>> Justin >>>> >> > >-- >Alex Harui >Flex SDK Team >Adobe Systems, Inc. >http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui >
