On 2010/12/23 17:27, Geoffrey De Smet wrote:
Not that I am mad, but yea, git knows which parent revision it came
from
and even which commits were cherry picked from master etc.
Sticking the revision in there isn't really useful, as it's not really
the revision that is going to be released:
there will be bugfix commits applied and possibly even big merges from
master.
What is bad, is the confusion this creates for anyone who isn't working
on the release.
What is the release branch for M1? Is it /5.2.0.M1.x/ or /5.2.0-M1.901ad86/?
/There can only be one./ And the rest of us need to be able to guess it.
So follow the naming convention we discussed earlier:
* all release branches should end in ".x"
o To avoid confusing them with release tags or topic branches
* all release tags should be equal to the version the represent
o and a tag should only be set just before it's uploaded to
the maven repo and then NEVER changed
+ Yes, with never I mean even if the release is broken.
Then just do a hotfix .1 (for example 5.1.1 or
5.2.0.M1.1) version
# because maven repo's are cached locally forever.
I do understand the idea here. Though I just thought the .x is a suffix
we can use to distinguish different branches we'v created for the same
release. For example, for this release we've already had two branches,
the first one is 5.2.0-M1.x. To distingush the new branch from existing
one, I name it as 5.2.0-M1.901ad86, which is essentially equal to
5.2.0-M1.2.
5.2.0-M1.2 can be interpreted as "attempt 2 for release 5.2.0-M1", while
5.2.0-M1.901ad86 can be interpreted as "attempt for release 5.2.0-M1
whose version is based on 901ad86", IMO more illustrative than ".2".
Did I get this right or I am still missing sth?
Thanks,
Jervis
for example:
* release branch 5.1.x
o with release tags 5.1.0.CR1, 5.1.0.FINAL, 5.1.1.FINAL
* release branch 5.2.0.M1.x
o with release tags 5.2.0.M1
* release branch 5.2.0.M2.x
o with release tags 5.2.0.M2
* release branch 5.2.x
o with release tags 5.2.0.CR1, 5.2.0.FINAL, 5.2.1.FINAL
Depending on the JBoss version number conventions, the finals release
versions should end in FINAL or GA or nothing.
It looks like it's ".FINAL" these days, not sure.
WDYT?
Op 23-12-10 09:41, Michael Anstis schreef:
> Ge0ffrey won't be happy ;)
>
> I'm sure he was keen to drop the revision\version number from the
> branch name; hence 5.2.0-M1 would probably have sufficed :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mike
>
> On 23 December 2010 06:22, Jervis Liu <jliu(a)redhat.com
> <mailto:jliu@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi, I've created a new branch for Drools 5.2.0-M1 release:
> 5.2.0-M1.901ad86. This branch is created from version
> 901ad86c8fad67051646. Check
>
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/droolsjbpm/commits/master?page=1 for
> version details. Please let me know if you think this branch
> should not
> contain a certain commit or a certain commit for 5.2.0-M1 release is
> missed on this branch.
>
> Cheers,
> Jervis
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
--
With kind regards,
Geoffrey De Smet
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev