db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Preparing to cut the 10.4 branch
Date Tue, 11 Mar 2008 12:54:48 GMT
Dyre.Tjeldvoll@Sun.COM wrote:
> Knut Anders Hatlen <Knut.Hatlen@Sun.COM> writes:
>
>   
>> Dyre.Tjeldvoll@Sun.COM writes:
>>
>>     
>>> I did some experimenting, and here are the results:
>>> Alt A: 
>>> With maint=0000001 and beta=true
>>> 10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861)
>>>
>>> Alt B:
>>> With maint=0000001 and beta=false
>>> 10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861M)
>>>
>>> Alt C:
>>> With maint=1000001 and beta=true
>>> 10.4.1.1 beta - (635861M)
>>>
>>> Alt D:
>>> With maint=1000001 and beta=false
>>> 10.4.1.1 - (635861M)
>>>
>>> So I thought alt. A was correct for the period from when the branch is
>>> cut up to the point when the first RC is spun (targetted for
>>> 2008-04-04), alt. C for the RC and alt. D for the final release.
>>>       
>> The release candidate should not have the beta flag. As long as it has
>> the beta flag it can't be released and therefore cannot be a candidate
>> for release... :)
>>
>>     
>>> But based on the comments I take it that I should go immediately to alt.
>>> C, and that alt. D should be used for the RC. If someone confirms this
>>> I can check in the change to release.properties and update the Wiki.
>>>       
>> Sounds reasonable to me. Although I had expected the last digit to be 0,
>> not 1 (we did release 10.1.1.0 and 10.2.2.0, as far as I remember).
>>     
>
> I don't know why it shouldn't be 0. But following the old instructions
> on the Wiki (either by running maintversion2props directly, or by doing
> ant bumplastdigit in tools/relase, which seems to be doing the same
> thing) I ended up with the last digit being 1...
>
> If it should in fact, be 0, then I have to ask that someone tells me
> exaclty what to do, step by step, so that I can re-write the Wiki from
> scratch...
>
>   
Hi Dyre,

This part of our release process seems to trip up every new release 
manager and the instructions could use some improvement. My 
understanding of bumplastdigit is this: you run it after you generate a 
candidate and it sets up the release id for the next candidate. In any 
event, with or without bumping the last digit, option (C) produces a 
release id that looks good to me.

Thanks,
-Rick

Mime
View raw message