incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Black <abl...@roguewave.com>
Subject Re: 4.2.0-rc-5 plans
Date Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:21:07 GMT
Travis Vitek wrote:
> Andrew Black wrote:
[snip]
>> SVN trunk at r580086 should be identical to branches/4.2.0 at r580483,
>> assuming the merge ran correctly.
>>
> 
> I don't know if that is a safe assumption or not. I believe that 4.2.1
> changes are happening on trunk but aren't being merged out to
> branches/4.2.0.

The change description for r580483 (
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=580483&view=rev ) indicates that Martin
was intending to merge the head of trunk to the 4.2.0 branch.  My
concern about starting 4.2.1 development on trunk is that it would no
longer be possible to perform merges like r580483.

> 
>> Opinions, please?
>>
> 
> I don't really understand exactly what the tags are used for, so I don't
> know how useful my feedback is. If these 'tags' are intended to indicate
> release candidates, as implied by the name, then it wouldn't make sense
> to skip changes that we know are going to make it into the release.

Tags are a way of attaching names to a specific set of source files.
Generally, a tag is a direct copy of trunk or a branch at a specific
change, but it doesn't have to be.  In Perforce terminology, it's
equivalent to using the 'p4 tag' command.  I guess I better way to put
my question would be 'Should the changes to the 4.2.0 branch since
r580483 be part of 4.2.0-rc-5 or 4.2.0-rc-6?'  Again, I feel it makes
more sense to have changes since r580483 be tagged as part of -rc-6, but
I'm looking for feedback before I create the tag.

--Andrew Black

Mime
View raw message