Yes, the tag in the pom is unimportant. I think it’s a hack to make maven-release-plugin work and has little other purpose. The tag we apply in git after the vote passes, and the commit id that we store elsewhere (e.g. in a vote thread) are more important.
> On Mar 8, 2016, at 2:21 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: > > Actually, including an rcX in the tag name shouldn't be a problem. > > The important bit is the SHA1 the tag points to. Per the new infra policy, > we'll have to make a rel/calcite-avatica-1.7.0 tag. The SHA1 is the important > bit, no? > > If it's just a matter of "how we do things", that's fine. Just wanted to make > sure I wasn't missing something. > > Josh Elser wrote: >> Ahh, ok. Will do. >> >> Also, incoming force-push on master. I forgot to switch to a new branch >> before doing the first Avatica RC. >> >> Julian Hyde wrote: >>>> On Mar 8, 2016, at 1:03 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> diff --git a/avatica/pom.xml b/avatica/pom.xml >>>> index 5bccbaf..8bd4b52 100644 >>>> --- a/avatica/pom.xml >>>> +++ b/avatica/pom.xml >>>> @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ limitations under the License. >>>> <connection>scm:git:https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/calcite.git</connection> >>>> >>>> <developerConnection>scm:git:https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/calcite.git</developerConnection> >>>> >>>> <url>https://github.com/apache/calcite</url> >>>> -<tag>HEAD</tag> >>>> +<tag>calcite-avatica-1.7.0-rc0</tag> >>>> </scm> >>> >>> >>> I’d have used "calcite-avatica-1.7.0” as the tag. At some point one of >>> those RCs will pass the vote and we won’t be able to go back and >>> change the tag! >>> >>> Julian >>>
