Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 11:01:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Hostetter <hossman_lucene@fucit.org>
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: releases
In-Reply-To: 
 <392521EA2692A2418DF48C331E61E32522F0@professorville.windows.esseff.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0610251051360.16555@hal.rescomp.berkeley.edu>
References: 
 <392521EA2692A2418DF48C331E61E32522F0@professorville.windows.esseff.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


: There a number of resolved Jira issues that spec the Fix Version/s as
: 2.0.1. I'm wondering if I'm interpreting this correctly: to me, this
: would mean that the changes have been checked into branches/lucene_2_0,
: not trunk. But these were actually checked into trunk. As far as the

I believe the method used in the past is that code is only ever commited
onto the trunk, and the Fix Version denotes what hypothetical version the
committer feels the issue is important enough to be released in.  Looking
at a list of all bugs marked "2.0.1" should give you an indication of what
code has been commited that people feel needs to be inlcuded in a 2.0.1
release, if/when a 2.0.1 release is made, those patches would be merged
from the trunk to the 2_0 branch.

Doug touched on this briefly here...

http://www.nabble.com/jira-workflow-tf2459130.html#a6860450

...there was a more in depth discussion about it back when 1.9/2.0 were
being planned,b ut i can't find it now.

I can't say for certain that people have been using Fix Version
consistently in that maner however.


-Hoss


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org