[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Release procedures improvements.

From: Branko ─îibej <brane_at_xbc.nu>
Date: 2005-04-05 02:11:23 CEST

Justin Erenkrantz wrote:

> --On Tuesday, April 5, 2005 12:50 AM +0100 Philip Martin
> <philip@codematters.co.uk> wrote:
>> Yes. The name need not contain 1.2 or even subversion, it's a very
>> short-term label after all, it doesn't need to be recognisable. The
>> tarball can be renamed when the RM decides to release it, all the
>> signtures should remain valid.
> I'm concerned that we would then end up with two files that are
> identical in all but name. And, for some reason, that strikes me as
> odd. -- justin

Now this I really don't understand. A file name is not a holy relic.
This is *exactly* like making a tag in the repostory -- for a moment,
you have two trees that are identical in all but URL. Big deal.

Using a different name for the prerelease tarball *and the prerelease
tag* will solve 99% of the jump-the-gun problems, and will still let us
keep the testing/signing public. So:




Then "blessing" includes renaming the tag and the tarballs. Signatures,
checksums etc remain valid, you can cut the tarball from the tag (which
is imho a better than modifying svn_version.h in the tag to fit the

-- Brane

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Apr 5 02:25:32 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.