incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Travis Vitek" <tvi...@quovadx.com>
Subject RE: 4.2.0-rc-5 plans
Date Mon, 01 Oct 2007 20:44:41 GMT
 

Andrew Black wrote:
>
>The question I have is whether it makes sense to tag branches/4.2.0 as
>of r580483 (Martin's integration) as tags/4.2.0-rc-5, or whether it
>makes more sense to include the changes which were merged today as part
>of the 4.2.0-rc-5 tag.  I would argue for the former, in part because I
>have some results from running the tests and examples under Rational
>PurifyPlus 7.0 ( http://www.ibm.com/software/awdtools/purifyplus/ )
>which I plan to post shortly.  This build was made using trunk at
>r580086 plus part of the patch attached to STDCXX-573.

I would archive the source used to generate the purify results with the
results. By capturing the source and headers you eliminate the possible
problems, and the decision of which revision to tag becomes irrelevant
wrt the purify runs. That is what I have done as mentioned in our
previous internal correspondence.

>
>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.

>
> 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.

Travis

Mime
View raw message