hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Marking fix version
Date Thu, 04 Apr 2013 17:18:43 GMT
Ok.


On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jon@cloudera.com> wrote:

> The argument for excluding the 0.96 tag makes sense.  Can we agree to do
> this:
>
> Commit only to trunk: Mark with 0.98
> Commit to 0.95 and trunk : Mark with 0.98, and 0.95.x
> Commit to 0.94.x and 0.95, and trunk: Mark with 0.98, 0.95.x, and 0.94.x
> Commit to 89-fb: Mark with 89-fb.
> Commit site fixes: no version
>
> Should we remove 0.96 tag for now until the branch appears again?
>
> Thanks,
> Jon.
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:10 AM, lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Thank Jon,
> >
> > I do not think we have to include anticipated future branches in the
> tags.
> > The release notes are not accumulative but list changes made for each
> > release.
> >
> > So if something is in 0.95.x a 0.96 tag neither needed nor wanted (IMHO)
> > until we actually have a *parallel* 0.96 branch.
> >
> > That is why all 0.95+trunk changes *have* to be tagged with 0.98 as well,
> > because at this point the two branches are in parallel. Actually we
> should
> > go through and make that so in jira.
> >
> > That means the 0.96 tag is not needed right now (and in fact will make
> > just confusing, because at the time we do release 0.96 we'll see the same
> > issue in the release notes twice)
> >
> > -- Lars
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >  From: Jonathan Hsieh <jon@cloudera.com>
> > To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> > Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 8:40 AM
> > Subject: Marking fix version
> >
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I just wanted to make sure we are on the same page here when we
> committing
> > code and that we are consistent when marking fix version in the jira.
>  Its
> > pretty important that we get this right because our release notes are
> > generated from these as of 0.94.
> >
> > Here's what I'm doing and suggesting
> >
> > Commit only to trunk: Mark with 0.98
> > Commit to 0.95 and trunk : Mark with 0.98, 0.96, and 0.95.x
> > Commit to 0.94.x and 0.95, and trunk: Mark with 0.98, 0.96, 0.95.x, and
> > 0.94.x
> > Commit to 89-fb: Mark with 89-fb.
> > Commit site fixes: no version
> >
> > My understanding is that 0.96 will be a branch off of 0.95 -- so any fix
> to
> > 0.95 is a fix to 0.96 until 0.96 branches.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jon.
> >
> > --
> > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > // jon@cloudera.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> // jon@cloudera.com
>



-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)

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