geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Blevins <david.blev...@visi.com>
Subject Re: Where did the 1.1 branch go?!?!
Date Thu, 15 Jun 2006 21:58:59 GMT

On Jun 15, 2006, at 2:18 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:

> David Blevins wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 15, 2006, at 12:22 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>
>>> David Blevins wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 15, 2006, at 11:48 AM, David Blevins wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 15, 2006, at 11:18 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> David Jencks wrote:
>>>>>>> -0.5 to copying branches/1.1 to branches/1.1.x and then  
>>>>>>> copying or moving to tags/1.1.x  Since ONLY BUG FIXES can  
>>>>>>> possibly be added to branches/1.1, this should not cause  
>>>>>>> problems.  The release manager gets say over what goes into a
 
>>>>>>> release, they can revert changes they don't want in the  
>>>>>>> release.  I think the copy to branches/1.1.x just adds steps
 
>>>>>>> for no gain.
>>>>>> I would upgrade this to a -1 on my part.
>>>>>
>>>>> Think you're getting kind of nit-picky on what you think is  
>>>>> easiest for a release manager to do.  I'd rather see us simply  
>>>>> agree on what the end result should be.
>>>>>
>>>>> IMHO, if a release manager wants to copy into a temp location  
>>>>> while they finalize the release (which can take days) to remove  
>>>>> the risk of having to roll back accidental changes, that's fine.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Actually, now that i think about it there is one more reason  
>>>> other than preference that I like making a branches/1.1.0 for  
>>>> release finalization.
>>>>
>>>>  -- branches/1.1 will never have geronimo_version=1.1 and people  
>>>> (including continuum) won't have fake 1.1 final jars in their  
>>>> repos.
>>> Why do we need geronimo_version=1.1 in branches/1.1.0?  Sorry,  
>>> I'm not following.
>>
>> Let me add the the item below and see if it doesn't make more sense.
>>
>> 1.    cp branches/1.1 to branches/1.1.0
>> 2.    in branches/1.1.0
>> 2.1   geronimo_version=1.1-SNAPSHOT -> geronimo_version=1.1
>> 2.2   update plugin version numbers
>> 2.3   update any hard coded poms or plans from 1.1-SNAPSHOT to 1.1
>> 3.    in branches/1.1
>> 3.1   geronimo_version=1.1-SNAPSHOT -> geronimo_version=1.1.1- 
>> SNAPSHOT
>> 3.2   update plugin version numbers
>> 3.3   update any hard coded poms or plans from 1.1-SNAPSHOT to  
>> 1.1.1-SNAPSHOT
>> 4.    eventually move branches/1.1.0 to tags/1.1.0 when release is  
>> actually final
>>
>> Make more sense?
> Yeah, but you still haven't explained why we need both to exist  
> concurrently.
>

Takes at least a week from code freeze till shipping day.

-David


Mime
View raw message