By the way, how about tagging, say, moment of a certain PIT build? Returning to this point may be necessary in situations with performance bugs (for instance).
Thanks, -Yuri On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 09:51:28AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > What you see below was just for practice. I had some discussions around > this in RE and with Kelly and the conclusion was that it would be > jdk7-bNN as you are suggesting. I will also tag specific milestones as > mentioned below. > > Thanks, > -Xiomara > > > Mark Reinhold wrote: > > >>Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 04:27:39 +0000 > >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>Changeset: 2e4d6d562de7 > >>Author: xdono > >>Date: 2007-11-09 20:03 -0800 > >>URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/rev/2e4d6d562de7 > >> > >>Added tag jdk7-ea-b99 for changeset 8792e7dbf130 > >> > >> > > > >The problem with this tag format, which is based on our ancient > >bundle-naming scheme, is that the middle token changes over time, > >from "ea" to "beta" to (maybe) "beta2" to "rc" to "fcs". This > >makes it unnecessarily difficult to look up a changeset for a > >specific build -- you also need to know in which phase of the > >release cycle it was promoted. > > > >I think it'd make more sense to use simple "jdk7-bNN" tags, and > >then also tag specific milestones as "jdk7-beta", "jdk7-rc1", > >"jdk7-fcs", etc. > > > >- Mark > > > > >
