The Two 2.0 Builds...To JRE, or Not to JRE, that is the question...

Seriously, that is my question. I had a bad bug in the build from yesterday and today I do not. Other than these 4 files, the main difference between to the two is yesterday's 2.0 build included a JRE and today's did not. Was that an accident or what?

cglib-nodep-2.1_3.jar
protobuf_license.txt
commons-logging-1.0.4.jar
xmlrpc-2.0.jar

12 comments
Comment actions Permalink

"yesterday's 2.0" "other .. 2.0"

Sorry, I'm not getting it. PLEASE ALWAYS USE EXACT BUILD NUMBERS, i.e. PS-103.99

0
Comment actions Permalink

They were both 103.99. I know they were the same, because we use a script that publishes this to a central server for deployment, and between the two versions, the script detected no changes. However, the script doesn't look for changed or added additional folders, just a changed to the .exe file.

Two versions of 2.0 / 103.99 were published over the last two days. One had the JRE and one did not.        

0
Comment actions Permalink

No idea. There's absolutely no way that two working *signed* nsis-packed exes can get same version number. And I definitely uploaded and announced only ONE this monday.

Probably some bugs on your deployment systems.

Anyway, Its obvious thats its safer to stick to app-bundled JRE on windows - its just much more tested both by us and other users.

0
Comment actions Permalink

I am not talking about the script. I can show you the two zip files, if you like.

And, BTW, we are NOT using an APP bundled JRE. Your JRE is what causd this: http://youtrack.jetbrains.net/issue/IDEA-65539

0
Comment actions Permalink

.zip files are NOT signed and you can't know that they are actually ours.
I'm the person who did the dist and I can assure you that I uploaded them once on monday, and then changed EAP page links. period.

ANYWAY if you so sure about SVN vs JDK bug - you should really add details about your solution to the issue and we need to investigate it.

0
Comment actions Permalink

I am sure, but I don't have time and I have a fix.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Grr....as I posted in the bug report, this issue has returned. It's a big deal. It's stopping us from doing our work. We had no issues with the last the last EAP.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Please keep feedback in issue - Plaform team do not monitors our PS dedicated forum.

0
Comment actions Permalink

The last time I did that, you said I was making too much discussion in the ticket. Just trying to follow your rules. I'll copy it over.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Actually, the latest build is listed as

Download version 2.0 build 103.98/99 (http://confluence.jetbrains.net/display/WI/Web+IDE+EAP)

I've never seen that. It has two build numbers?

Also, it's dated 2/9, not 2/14 as your indicated. Is something amiss?

0
Comment actions Permalink

WS has 98 and PS has 99.

As for date change - looks like it was lost in editing. Anyway proper one is always hardcoded inside the dist during the build process and visible on ABOUT (or within jars).

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.