Re: [jbosstools-dev] feedback on fixing missing alpha/beta/cr tags
On 5 May 2015, at 14:59, Nick Boldt wrote:
Makes sense for missing tags up to the first .Final (the Beta1x,
Beta2x,
etc. branches).
yup.
Does not compute for CR1, Final, and all future maintenance as these
all
come from the same 4.n.x branch.
I did not spot any such in the output, did you ?
Otherwise I'll go ahead and run the same script, but in
"beast-create-tag"-mode
/max
On 05/05/2015 07:17 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
> I updated the script I made for checking tags to also print out
> "closest"
> 'x' branch.
>
> For example for jbosstools-server that gives us:
>
> ```
> jbosstools-server missing 10 tags:
> jbosstools-4.1.0.Beta1 (jbosstools-4.1.0.Beta1x),
> jbosstools-4.1.1.Beta1 (jbosstools-4.1.1.Beta1x),
> jbosstools-4.1.1.CR1,
> jbosstools-4.2.0.Alpha2 (jbosstools-4.2.0.Alpha2x),
> jbosstools-4.2.0.Beta1 (jbosstools-4.2.0.Beta1x),
> jbosstools-4.2.0.Beta2 (jbosstools-4.2.0.Beta2x),
> jbosstools-4.2.0.Beta3 (jbosstools-4.2.0.Beta3x),
> jbosstools-4.2.3.Beta1,
> jbosstools-4.2.3.CR1,
> jbosstools-4.3.0.Alpha1 (jbosstools-4.3.0.Alpha1x)
> ```
>
> Full list at:
> https://gist.github.com/maxandersen/78ffedc1edb9569b35b2
>
> Using the tip of the branch seem to be the simplest way to fix this
> with
> the 'best' tag possible.
>
> Anyone with good arguments for or against doing this ?
>
> (I already have a script ready that can fix this this way, but I
> wanted
> make sure I'm not
> missing something obviously bad about this idea)
>
> /max
> http://about.me/maxandersen
> _______________________________________________
> jbosstools-dev mailing list
> jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
>
--
Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red Hat
Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools & Dev Studio
http://nick.divbyzero.com
_______________________________________________
jbosstools-dev mailing list
jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
/max
http://about.me/maxandersen