[#32578] - [3.9.25] Joomla 3.9.25 was released with __DEPLOY_VERSION__ placeholders...
- Closed
- 18 Mar 2021
- Medium
- Build: staging
- # 32578
On code review of Joomla 3.9.25 distributed Zip file there are multiple places where @since __DEPLOY_VERSION__ is located and not replaced.
There are SIX __DEPLOY_VERSION__ in the distributed Joomla 3.9.25 stable zip.
Eg: /administrator/components/com_banners/models/banners.php and other files modified in 2387bb0
/**
* Method to validate the form data.
*
* @param JForm $form The form to validate against.
* @param array $data The data to validate.
* @param string $group The name of the field group to validate.
*
* @return array|boolean Array of filtered data if valid, false otherwise.
*
* @see JFormRule
* @see JFilterInput
* @since __DEPLOY_VERSION__
*/
public function validate($form, $data, $group = null)
{
Further issue to be resolved
Then after the Joomla 3.9.25 release, the commit "Reset to dev" 2387bb0 then replaced __DEPLOY_VERSION__ with 3.9.26
However this is now factually incorrect, as the code was actually in 3.9.25 and released, but the __DEPLOY_VERSION__ was not replaced prior to release.
Someone needs to go through the commit at 2387bb0 and manually correct the version numbers :-(
joomla-cms-bot
- | Labels |
Added:
?
|
||
or just run /usr/bin/php /path/to/joomla-cms/build/bump.php -v 3.9.whatever
before packging
https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/blob/staging/build/bump.php#L324 should do the trick
or... you could read the actual text of the issue to understand that would then make it even more factually incorrect /faceplam
or just run /usr/bin/php /path/to/joomla-cms/build/bump.php -v 3.9.whatever before packging
Im not a Release Lead... This release was badly prepped and released, the git log shows that.
What ACTUALLY needs doing:
- Six places in staging need
__DEPLOY_VERSION__manually replacing with3.9.25 - The places in staging that have
3.9.26need to be manually replaced with3.9.25
me neither,
i'm just guessing what has gone probably wrong or in a wrong order
More time is spend discussing it and posting screenshots than it would take to fix it
@HLeithner I assume knows what he did wrong I assume, it looks like there was an issue with the copyright year, and so the release was prepared, changed and then prepared again without thought to the knock on effects... and with the last min addition to security fixes.
This issue documents the knock on effects and what is needed to ensure that the integrity of the @since tags is resolved.
More time is spend discussing it and posting screenshots than it would take to fix it
PRs welcome is less chars to type ;-)
| Status | New | ⇒ | Closed |
| Closed_Date | 0000-00-00 00:00:00 | ⇒ | 2021-03-18 12:48:52 |
| Closed_By | ⇒ | PhilETaylor |
I want to work on it