On 5 August 2011 10:26, Spencer Oliver <s...@spen-soft.co.uk> wrote: > 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 >
use git describe --tags to take all tags (including soft) into account. Spen _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
