--On Saturday, April 2, 2005 4:18 PM -0800 Ben Reser <email@example.com> wrote:
> What's the confusion? I always announced on IRC when I was soliciting
> testing what revision the release was cut from on the branch. The only
> difference that would ever exist between the tag and the branch would be
> the minor differences between the svn_version.h file.
It wasn't done on a mailing list, so the feedback was limited to whomever was
on IRC at that particular time. Since we want to solicit signatures before
announcing, we now need to make the announcement more widespread (and I
believe, necessitating an email).
Therefore, I believe it needs to be clearer where the release originated from:
rather than just a revision from a directory, an actual directory that
contains the tag.
> I have no problem with tossing the revision number if we toss the
> tarball. But I don't think the tag should exist until we decide that it
> is a good release.
Once we decide to do a release, then at the point, the release exists. We
can't (or shouldn't!) change the tag. The only difference is whether we make
(or, recommend, depending upon your perspective) the release public or not:
i.e. is it a good release? But, the issue is that the version is
done...goodness or not is the question.
> I think that's highly optomistic. Our repository is a communication
> medium. Basically if you don't read dev you can't be sure what the
> status of the tag is. When I've done announcements on the weekends
> sometimes the announcement email hasn't been moderated through until
The release isn't official until we say it is. =)
> If you absolutely must have a tag then name it 1.1.4-test or something
> like that. If the release is okay then mv it to 1.1.4, if it's trashed
> then we just delete it and never post that tarball and start over with
> But I really do believe that creating a tag says "this is a release."
Once we soliciting signatures, it means that it is a release. Hence, I feel
it should be in tags/.
> Frankly, I've always wondered why we don't have a "tags" directory and a
> "releases" directory. It seems cluttered to have release tags mixed
> with unrelated tags that we might want to use. Plus having a releases
> directory enhances the communication factor that the tag represents.
> There can be a 1.1.4 in tags, but if we decide to never call it a
> release for some reason it just wouldn't exist in releases.
That would work fine and would address a lot of your concerns. I'd like to
hear what others think about it first... -- justin
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Sun Apr 3 02:37:35 2005