On 6/1/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 19:05 +0100, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> Henri Yandell wrote:
> > I pondered it for a while. The tag is of value - it's so we can start
> > a branch if trunk suddenly becomes untenable. My biggest concern with
> > Simon's reason was that it encourages read-write tags if we take it
> > fully.
> >
> > Ideally we would copy the rc tag to the release tag, modify the rc
> > bits to the real release and then build a release. Are we happy with
> > tags being edited like that?
not really: makes it a lot more difficult to work out what the release
was actually cut from
<snip/>
Agreed, best to have tags read only.
> Well I know I'd have to rethink all the scripts I've now worked up to
> get releases out consistently and easily.
>
> Sounds like all we might agree on here is for each release manager to
> make a choice.
i'm unhappy about tags being deleted and i don't really think it's
necessary with subversion.
<snap/>
Same here.
why not separate releases from release candidates?
for example:
commons-whatever ----- trunk
|
- branches
|
- tags
|
- candidates
|
- releases
- robert
<snip/>
The purpose being trying to avoid tag clutter in the tags directory?
Lets stick to a tag naming convention and let the sleeping dogs die?
-Rahul
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
