aurora-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Farner <b...@twitter.com>
Subject Re: Tagging process
Date Sat, 14 Dec 2013 02:26:00 GMT
This sounds good to me.

-=Bill


On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Kevin Sweeney <kevints@apache.org> wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> I think figuring out the tagging process sooner than later is in
> everyone's best interest so that we can get out of cherry-pick limbo. I'm
> out next week, but if anyone wants to take a stab at it (using
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/16265/ as a starting point or just throw it
> away, please feel free). My thinking:
>
> .auroraversion on master only ever contains -SNAPSHOT versions. This makes
> it harder for someone to reset and accidentally creating bogus non-SNAPSHOT
> artifacts.
>
> At each tag there are 2 commits. One on an anonymous branch that does
> s/-SNAPSHOT// and one on master that increments the MINOR portion of the
> version. So if master is 0.2.0-SNAPSHOT this new branch will have 0.2.0.
> For that commit we create an annotated (preferably PGP-signed) tag, 0.2.0.
> The other commit on master changes .auroraversion to 0.3.0-SNAPSHOT.
>
> Once everything is verified we'll push 2 things - the new master and the
> tag (so origin will not have a name for the branch the tag was created on).
>
> What does everyone think of this process?
>  --
> Kevin Sweeney
> @kts
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message