Closed Bug 633254 Opened 9 years ago Closed 9 years ago
.9 .1/comm-1 .9 .2 bundles weekly
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #614010 +++ Similar to bug 437482, but the MDN page (https://developer.mozilla.org/En/Developer_Guide/Source_Code/Mercurial) also mentions comm-central, so we should probably bundle that, too. What about doing the same for comm-1.9.2 and comm-1.9.1?
Summary: upload comm-central bundles weekly → upload comm-1.9.1/comm-1.9.2 bundles weekly
(In reply to comment #0) > What about doing the same for comm-1.9.2 and comm-1.9.1? I certainly don't care about comm-1.9.1 as this is obsolete for us now. For comm-1.9.2 I'd say use the source bundles that are generated with each release.
Yea, as long as Firefox doesn't wish to do a mozilla-* bundle on those branches, I'd suggest WONTFIX for our end as well; the source bundles will serve the purpose for the majority of people who want source for those branches; and we ALL generate full source with each release.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
(In reply to comment #1) > I certainly don't care about comm-1.9.1 as this is obsolete for us now. Understandable (wrt Thunderbird). Though SeaMonkey 2.0.x has not been obsoleted (yet) :-| Is there an official c-1.9.* bundle available? Like one created at COMM_1_9_?_BASE (or newer) tag? Could we plan on (manually) creating a (new) bundle whenever c-1.9.* is de-supported? > For comm-1.9.2 I'd say use the source bundles that are generated with each > release. I guess a "more mercurial" workaround would be to: 1) Unbundle a/latest c-c bundle. 2) Strip changesets after COMM_1_9_?_BASE tags. 3) Update to c-1.9.* tip. (In reply to comment #2) > as long as Firefox doesn't wish to do a mozilla-* bundle on those > branches, Ftr, bug 644157 eventually did it for m-1.9.1/m-1.9.2/m-2.0/m-2.1 branches.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.