cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Shuler <mich...@pbandjelly.org>
Subject Re: A home for 4.0
Date Thu, 29 Sep 2016 13:56:00 GMT
Thanks! To clarify, yes, I was just being silly. We mostly use the
base.version in build.xml for version checking and we can special-case
branch names like we do for trunk, if the needed.

-- 
Michael

On 09/29/2016 08:17 AM, Sylvain Lebresne wrote:
> And of course I've been retarded and created a '3.X' branch with is
> completely inconsistent with our usual branch naming. So I actually just
> renamed that to 'cassandra-3.X' instead. I apologize for the inconvenience
> if any (there hasn't been any commit since I created the branch though, so
> hopefully nobody was inconvenienced).
> 
> Again, my bad, but we should be good to go now.
> 
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Sylvain Lebresne <sylvain@datastax.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> So, this is done now and I've renamed the version on trunk to 4.0, so be
>> sure to commit/merge to 3.X before going to trunk from now on.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Sylvain Lebresne <sylvain@datastax.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> As there has been no strong objection, I'm going to proceed and create
>>> the branch.
>>>
>>> Note that I'm discarding Michael remark as a joke due to the use of a
>>> smiley, but just in case that was a genuine concern, I'll argue that 1)
>>> 'trunk' isn't really more arithmetic friendly so I don't think there is too
>>> much reliance on this for branch names out there and 2) I really don't care
>>> about the branch name, 3.X just feels the more natural, but if something
>>> thing just calling it '3' or something else would be better, be my guest
>>> and rename it.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Michael Shuler <michael@pbandjelly.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I foresee many arithmetic errors with 3.X.. :)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>> On 09/27/2016 05:18 AM, Sylvain Lebresne wrote:
>>>>> We have a number of tickets that we now have to wait on 4.0 due to
>>>> needing a
>>>>> messaging protocol change or major sstable format (
>>>> https://goo.gl/OvqNQp),
>>>>> and
>>>>> we currently have no branch for those. And as 4.0 was initially
>>>> supposed to
>>>>> come
>>>>> after 3.11, which is coming, it's probably time to have a home for
>>>> those
>>>>> tickets.
>>>>>
>>>>> And as 4.0 should probably be the 'trunk' (at least it's how we've
>>>> always
>>>>> done),
>>>>> I'm proposing to create a new '3.X' branch from trunk as home for the
>>>>> remaining
>>>>> 3.x tick-tock release. In that configuration, the merge path will
>>>> become:
>>>>>
>>>>>     2.1 -> 2.2 -> 3.0 -> 3.X -> trunk (future 4.0)
>>>>>
>>>>> Any strong objection to me creating that branch?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sylvain Lebresne
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 


Mime
View raw message