On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 03:58:55PM -0800, Sander Striker wrote: > > If the RELEASE_VERSION is an optional parameter (in which case the > > script would try to figure out the name of the tarball based on the > > TAG) what happens when the TAG does not contain a version? Does it > > fail? Want to write that code? *grin* > > Uhm, we could either just extract the version from the version header, > or, just require the tag contains a version.
Maybe I'm not explaining myself. I don't want to have to make a CVS tag to make a simple tarball. I want to make tarballs from HEAD so that our beta testers can get their bleeding-edge-craving hands on something to play with. I would like to make new tarballs every few days (encorporating the fixes provided by our testers) until we have something stable that we'd like to make a release version. I am changing the way we do releases in APR (or at least, I am stepping up to do it my way because I think it is better). I believe this can dramatically improve the release process of APR (and HTTPD where I'm making the same changes). I also think this will help this project take advantage of willing and eager testers who continually submit patches to this list and are ignored. > > I reject the idea that making releases should be difficult. This patch > > makes tarball creation easy. Anyone can now spontaneously decide to make > > a tarball with much less effort (no fussing with getting everyone to > > agree on a TAG before we agree on the code). > > Making releases isn't any more difficult with that code in. Actually it > makes it harder since you have to carefully retype the version number > you also used to tag. Making official releases is only a special use case of this script. > We might also just aswell disallow creation of tarballs from 'HEAD', > since those aren't recreatable. We should never do that. The only tarballs that need to be recreatable are official releases. -aaron
