Hey all, I think figuring out the tagging process sooner than later is in everyone's best interest so that we can get out of cherry-pick limbo. I'm out next week, but if anyone wants to take a stab at it (using https://reviews.apache.org/r/16265/ as a starting point or just throw it away, please feel free). My thinking:
.auroraversion on master only ever contains -SNAPSHOT versions. This makes it harder for someone to reset and accidentally creating bogus non-SNAPSHOT artifacts. At each tag there are 2 commits. One on an anonymous branch that does s/-SNAPSHOT// and one on master that increments the MINOR portion of the version. So if master is 0.2.0-SNAPSHOT this new branch will have 0.2.0. For that commit we create an annotated (preferably PGP-signed) tag, 0.2.0. The other commit on master changes .auroraversion to 0.3.0-SNAPSHOT. Once everything is verified we'll push 2 things - the new master and the tag (so origin will not have a name for the branch the tag was created on). What does everyone think of this process? -- Kevin Sweeney @kts
