Am 29.11.2015 um 12:51 schrieb Georg Baum <georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de>:
> Richard Heck wrote:
>
>> On 11/28/2015 10:17 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
>>
>>> Besides this it seems that I built the lyx.exe including this patch.
>>> This was not the plan and I hate git for this. It is hard to figure
>>> out what branch is now really used. I took Scott's file into my build
>>> branch but it seems I compiled git master nevertheless.
>
> If you do not pay attention to what the git advocates say ("it is easy to
> switch branches, therefore you should use only one working directory for
> several branches"), and use one separate working directory for master and
> one for stable, then it is easy not to get confused. If you don't know how
> to do that, ask, and you'll get help.
>
>> Are the Windows binaries being built from some git branch and not from
>> the tarball? Or am I misunderstanding something?
>
> I hope not. We discussed very deeply for the 2.1 release that an installer
> that is labelled "2.2.0 alpha2" has to be built from the source tar ball
> "2.2.0 alpha2", and not from a git checkout. This is true BTW for all
> packagers on all operating systems.
Yes, I agree and I'm aware of it. On Mac this is the case.
Stephan
