myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Dudney <bdud...@mac.com>
Subject Re: tags, branches and 'current'
Date Fri, 23 Sep 2005 14:30:50 GMT

On Sep 23, 2005, at 8:13 AM, Sean Schofield wrote:

> We can certainly create a branch but the idea is that we eventually
> have an official release and that's it.  Of course there will be minor
> bugs and those just get fixed in the next release.  If you need
> something before then you use the nightly.  This is kind of a weird
> exception.
>

Well agreed partly. Any release has bugs, some have to be fixed some  
can wait until the next official release. For bugs that must be fixed  
in the existing release we can and should be changing a branch (and  
of course applying the same fix to the trunk). The reason this is  
important is that some users can't tolerate the risk of being on the  
trunk because of the unstable (perceived or true) nature of trunk.  
Instead they want to be on a relatively stable branch that is changed  
only slightly and only when a 'big' bug is found and fixed.

This does increase our overhead but I think given the state of the  
project (how many users) we need to get to this level of  
sophistication. We are also at the state where we really need  
automated tests to help us make sure we've not hosed ourselves. I  
will try to get some automation done WRT running 'simple' with both  
myfaces-all.jar and (myfaces-api.jar, myfaces-impl.jar, and  
tomahawk.jar) which should at least prevent problems like this from  
sneaking past us.

> Even with a branch we need tagged releases and creating either is not
> exactly trivial because of all of the subprojects.  See my wiki
> instructions for an example of what is required
> (http://wiki.apache.org/myfaces/Building_a_Release).
>

Yes this is the downside of subprojects & externals.

> Its still not clear to me the difference between svn tags and branches
> because you can (after ignoring warnings) check into a tagged version.
>  So in this case this is what I suggest we do b/c the error is such a
> significant one.
>

tags are by convention not commited to but are instead a constant  
'state of the project at a point in time'
branches are used as described earlier

> Normally I would say we should change the release number, etc. and do
> an official release (even if its just a minor change) and maybe we
> should consider that in order to avoid confusion (are you using the
> new or old 1.1.0?)

I like 1.1.1, or 1.1.0.1 (too long IMO). I'm open though.

TTFN,

-bd-

>
> sean
>
>
> On 9/23/05, Mike Kienenberger <mkienenb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm certainly no expert in making releases nor am I a committer, but
>> why start off being sloppy?  There's a bug that warrants an immediate
>> release.   There's no guarantee that another such bug won't turn up
>> after the next release and require another release.   That's what
>> branches are for, so why resist using them?
>>
>> Because work on MyFaces are ongoing, it's not reasonable to try to
>> support maintenance releases without branches, is it?
>>
>> On 9/23/05, Sean Schofield <sean.schofield@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sigh.  How did we miss this one?  I thought we did a test of
>>> everything?  This is probably the only type of error where we could
>>> justify doing this although its kind of embarassing that it happened
>>> in the first place.
>>>
>>> Technically you can check into a tagged version so this is probably
>>> the best thing to do.  Let me know when its done (and tested) and I
>>> can do a rebuild and re-publish of the myfaces binary bundles  
>>> over the
>>> weekend.
>>>
>>> sean
>>>
>>> On 9/23/05, Martin Marinschek <martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We have been discussing doing a release as the problem with the
>>>> faces-config.xml missing in the myfaces-all.jar is a very prominent
>>>> one ;)
>>>>
>>>> If there is a way of fixing the existing release with just the
>>>> faces-config.xml file, that would be better!
>>>>
>>>> regards,
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>> On 9/23/05, Sean Schofield <sean.schofield@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> as long as 1_1_0 is ok to change (by convention tags are not
>>>>>> modified, only branches).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Technically you can change it but SVN (at least Tortoise SVN)  
>>>>> warns
>>>>> you and says its a tag and you shouldn't.  Why do we need a  
>>>>> branch at
>>>>> this point?
>>>>>
>>>>> We could create a branch for it but lets establish why this is  
>>>>> necessary first.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> All I'm looking for is a place to change the release only  
>>>>>> enough to
>>>>>> get the faces-config.xml file in place (as well as the other  
>>>>>> missing
>>>>>> bits because that file is not found) and then get a new release
>>>>>> pushed out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin M is planning on doing another release from the trunk  
>>>>>> after I
>>>>>> finish my commit. That is fine but risky.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We're doing a release?  I haven't read every message on the dev  
>>>>> list
>>>>> but I must have missed this discussion.  What is the motivation  
>>>>> for
>>>>> this?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> TTFN,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -bd-
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> sean
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 23, 2005, at 5:53 AM, Sean Schofield wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note that after I tagged the 1.1 release I created a external
 
>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>> "release" dir so if you use
>>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/release/1_1_0/ you  
>>>>>>> will get
>>>>>>> "current" but for the release.  It doesn't include sandbox so
 
>>>>>>> its not
>>>>>>> quite the same but sandbox is not part of the official release.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Doesn't this give you what you need?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sean
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/23/05, Martin Marinschek <martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I agree with Martin on this - if you need everything, you
 
>>>>>>>> can always
>>>>>>>> checkout MyFaces, right?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/23/05, Martin Cooper <martinc@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Bill Dudney wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well the idea is that people would then be using
current/ 
>>>>>>>>>> trunk
>>>>>>>>>> to checkout
>>>>>>>>>> instead of just current.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But by definition, what's in branches and tags is not
 
>>>>>>>>> current, so
>>>>>>>>> why does
>>>>>>>>> it make sense to include them under 'current'? The  
>>>>>>>>> structure you
>>>>>>>>> described
>>>>>>>>> is exactly what you have without using the 'current'
 
>>>>>>>>> external in
>>>>>>>>> the first
>>>>>>>>> place, isn't it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Martin Cooper
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> TTFN,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -bd-
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 22, 2005, at 12:31 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Bill Dudney wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to propose that we change current
to be;
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>>>>>>    /branches
>>>>>>>>>>>>    /tags
>>>>>>>>>>>>    /trunk
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Still all externals but tracking the group
of tags &  
>>>>>>>>>>>> branches
>>>>>>>>>>>> that are
>>>>>>>>>>>> common across all the subprojects.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> current/trunk -> becomes what we currently
call current
>>>>>>>>>>>> current/branches -> currently empty
>>>>>>>>>>>> current/tags -> 1_1_0 with externals to
each subproject's
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1_1_0 tag
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I would recommend against doing that. It would
mean that
>>>>>>>>>>> everyone checking
>>>>>>>>>>> out 'current' would end up with multiple copies
of the  
>>>>>>>>>>> entire
>>>>>>>>>>> source tree,
>>>>>>>>>>> which is unlikely to be something that they would
want.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Most people are unlikely to want more than one
version of  
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> source at any
>>>>>>>>>>> given time, so I don't see a need to clump together
multiple
>>>>>>>>>>> versions in a
>>>>>>>>>>> single checkout.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Martin Cooper
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> To fix the faces-config.xml bug that's been
identified  
>>>>>>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1_1_0
>>>>>>>>>>>> release we can create a branch in current/branches/1_1_0
 
>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> uses
>>>>>>>>>>>> externals to the tags for everything but
'build' which  
>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>>> point to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1_1_0 branch in build (not yet created but
I'd be glad  
>>>>>>>>>>>> to do
>>>>>>>>>>>> that).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> TTFN,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -bd-
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.irian.at
>>>>>>>> Your JSF powerhouse -
>>>>>>>> JSF Trainings in English and German
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> http://www.irian.at
>>>> Your JSF powerhouse -
>>>> JSF Trainings in English and German
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>


Mime
View raw message