Technically, they are the same. It is possible, though not normal, to commit to a tag.
<quote> isn't this tag-creation procedure the same procedure we used to create a branch? Yes, in fact, it is. In Subversion, there's no difference between a tag and a branch. Both are just ordinary directories that are created by copying. Just as with branches, the only reason a copied directory is a “tag” is because humans have decided to treat it that way: as long as nobody ever commits to the directory, it forever remains a snapshot. If people start committing to it, it becomes a branch. </quote> On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 17:02 +0200, Philippe Valembois - Phil wrote: > Why Sander said that branches and tags are the same ? > If they were the same why would be there a directory branches and a directory > tags ? > Phil > > Le Thursday 15 June 2006 16:43, Youness Alaoui a écrit : > > On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:04:29 -0400, Arieh Schneier > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> 1) now we have to update the version in the amsn file.. what should it > > >> become? More generally, what will this release be? > > >> 0.96rc1 followed by rc2, then rc..., then 0.96 > > >> or 0.96 followed by 0.96.1, etc > > >> i would say the second, because if we don't have critical bugs, ... > > > > > > I agree, I think the second, because that is what we have always done > > > before. > > > > I don't... an RC, is a release candidate, from the very start, we had an > > RC in mind, we were 'going to release with known bugs'.. we can't do that > > on an official release.. so this IS an RC, not a release... I do accept > > the 0.96, 0.96.1, etc... numbering, the bugfixes thing, etc... but not for > > this release... this is an RC, and should not be considered anything else. > > So, we release this as 0.96.RC1 or 0.96RC1, whatever you want... the > > autoupdater should consider it as 0.96b.. which means > 0.95 and < 0.96 .. > > right ? do tests if you want. > > once we get the RC1 and maybe other RCs out of the way, we can release > > 0.96, then if you want and if needed, 0.96.1 and 0.96.2, etc... > > > > if you don't want to go through the 'RC' process, then you should have > > said so a few weeks ago, or months ago, so we would have fixed those huge > > critical issues we have now... if everyone wants it the way you said, then > > the release will have to postponed, in order for us to teak our brains > > into thinking "damn, it's a production release, we must get all the bugs > > out, before... it's not an RC...", then release... > > > > >> 2) are all binaries updated? > > > > > > Why not? > > > > we should still check, we should recompile, just in case.. or use svn to > > see the revision number of the binaries against the rev number of each of > > the sources... > > > > >> 3) do we create a tag for this release in svn? (A tag and a branch are > > >> the same in svn, technically) So does it have any benefits to create a > > >> tag, when we already have a 0.96 branch, which we can check out by > > >> revision number, if bugfixes later are done in this branch. > > > > > > Make a tag on the main branch? That is pointless because that isnt the > > > 0.96, > > > and we arent going to be integrating changes (accept for bugfixes if we > > > plan > > > to release a 0.96.1). So I think we don't need to tag it. > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Amsn-devel mailing list > > > Amsn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amsn-devel > > > _______________________________________________ > Amsn-devel mailing list > Amsn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amsn-devel _______________________________________________ Amsn-devel mailing list Amsn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amsn-devel
