geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <d...@iq80.com>
Subject Re: [discuss] branch and tag policy (and stable/unstable mixed in :)
Date Mon, 19 Sep 2005 20:03:54 GMT
On Sep 19, 2005, at 12:05 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

> For my part, I don't understand why we don't keep branches alive  
> forever, or at least until we vote on discontinuing support for the  
> release the branch is tied to.  We can vote to trash M4 in favor of  
> M5 if we like, but I don't think 24 hours and <5 votes is enough to  
> say the issues was decided.

This wasn't a vote.  I consider this a trivial issue and the feedback  
I got reaffirmed it.  More over, this is SVN is someone were to  
object, they can simply add the branch back.

> As for the confusion of branches and tags, Dain, can you clarify if  
> your confusion is caused strictly by this being a milestone  
> release?  I mean, if this was the v3.2 branch, and we had a v3.2.0  
> tag while the 3.2 branch HEAD was used for development toward  
> 3.2.1, would that be confusing?

I found it confusing because it is a milestone.  The scenario you lay  
out using real three part revision system makes perfect sense to me.   
In your scenario, we would have the following:

trunk (future v4_0)

branches/v3_0
tags/v3_0_0
tags/v3_0_1

branches/v3_1
tags/v3_1_0

so we have the following progression in a three part  
major.minor.micro system:

trunk                       --> branches/v${major++}_0
branches/v${major}_${minor} --> branches/v${major}_${minor++}
branches/v${major}_${minor} --> tags/v${major}_${minor}_${micro++}

> I think that's the approach we have to take, and whacking the 3.2  
> branch as soon as 3.2.0 was released with the intention of  
> "resurrecting it" if we ever decided to work on 3.2.1, well, that  
> doesn't make any sense to me.  But of course there is no M4.0 and  
> M4.1 so the whole issue is kind of muddy regarding milestones, and  
> I don't really care what we do to the M-series.

I completely agree with you.  But I believe that using the process  
above we are at this point:

trunk        == branches/v0_9
tags/v1_0_m4 == tags/v0_9_4
tags/v1_0_m5 == tags/v0_9_5

By this I mean that there won't be any further release off a  
milestone.  It is effectively a tag on the "0.9" branch we are  
calling trunk.


This is really all to confusing now... maybe we should move to  
numbers, and then it we will be crystal clear to everyone how this  
community will treat any release.  If we decide to rename m5 to  
0.9.5, it is clear we have no intention to maintain it.  If we rename  
m5 to 0.5.0, it is clear to everyone that we intend on maintaining it.

-dain

Mime
View raw message