On 5 August 2011 10:19, Andreas Fritiofson <andreas.fritiof...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Spencer Oliver <s...@spen-soft.co.uk> > wrote: >> >> On 5 August 2011 09:58, Andreas Fritiofson <andreas.fritiof...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Øyvind Harboe <oyvind.har...@zylin.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> When I run git describe now I get v0.4.0-973-g0d7a948 rather than >> >> a v0.5.0-rc2-xxxx. >> >> >> >> Is that intentional? >> >> >> >> I think it's nice that we stick to v0.4.0-xxxx until v0.5.0-xxxx goes >> >> out >> >> of the door. >> >> >> >> I have no particular opinion, except it should be by choice and not >> >> by accident :-) >> >> >> > >> > As I posted several times already, it's because the release procedure >> > wasn't >> > followed in creating the rc tags and tarballs. >> >> I will agree that the release process has not been followed with >> regards to tarballs. >> However this is not the cause of Øyvind query - please see my previous >> email. > > "Release tags are annotated, and so take priority with git describe." > Ok, but if the release script would have been used, the v0.5.0-rc* tags > would have been annotated. And they really should be, right? That's what the > script does, the 0.4.0 and 0.3.0 rc tags were annotated, and it corresponds > with Øyvind's initial expectation of a v0.5.0-rc2-xxxx output from git > describe. > /Andreas >
Release tags are annotated, but not rc tags Spen _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
