Yuri Nesterenko wrote:
By the way, how about tagging, say, moment of a certain PIT build?
A few of us (Mark R., kto, etc.) discussed this and decided to only have
tags for promoted builds -- to reduce the number of tags.
Returning to this point may be necessary in situations with performance
bugs (for instance).
Yes, that would be helpful. Is how this is handle now not sufficient?
Thanks,
-Xiomara
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
