Added the dummy buildId if not specified

[EricLeiLi]

buildId is required in bar descriptor to pass build and release:
we should always generate it even the user doesn't specify it.

Fixes blackberry#211

[jeffheifetz]

Testing for this needs to cover all signing scenarios including debug tokens

[jeffheifetz]

@jkeshavarzi Did we used to have a warning for missing buildId that will now not get hit?

[jamesjhedley]

@jeffheifetz I believe the behavior is it will show a warning if you provided a password but no buildId.

[EricLeiLi]

My change shouldn't affect signing as it only modifies the internal variable "xmlObject" which will be used to generate bar-descriptor.xml. When we sign the bar file, we checked beforehead and it uses command line to specify buildId but not use the value in generated bar-descriptor.xml. It only affects the case that user wants to sign his unsigned bar manually, however in that case, they should specifcy buildId though command argument provided by the signer.
My fix is the fail safe for build and release because the build will fail without buildId placeholder which no one can do anything at that point.

[jamesjhedley]

I'm kinda with @jeffheifetz with this one. I feel uneasy forcing a buildId on the user. I can't say for sure if this would cause any issues. I don't think it would... but who knows. What happens if they try and sign their unsigned-bar afterwards and a buildId of 1 was already set? Would it have issues signing?

[EricLeiLi]

Before they cannot sign the bar, either, because of no buildId. Now it has a dummy buildId. But either way, if they choose to sign it manually, they need to specify the buildId at that time. It won't cause issue in the real environment when people are trying to sigh his application seriously. Without the fail safe, build will fail for build and release and build and release staff won't fix it for us, that's why we need some fail safe method.

[ericpearson]

I still think we don't need a build id, I never specify one when I use the native packager/signer and it always works, maybe my computer is magic I don't know

[ericpearson]

I understand this is needed for qnx, I opened an issue for something else related to build id

[jamesjhedley]

@Pagey Are you sure you aren't trying to sign a bar that already has a build ID set internally? Maybe that's why it works for you? Not sure, just a random thought...

[EricLeiLi]

Currently if the user specify version=1.0.0.xxx, xxx will become buildId. It can be used as a solution for build and release. So I will close the pull request for now.