On 13/05/2009, Dan Fabulich <d...@fabulich.com> wrote: > Mark Struberg wrote: > > > > > > > > > So if you tag the RC as DBUTILS_1_2_RC1 then the source code includes > "RC1". If you then later copy that tag to "DBUTILS_1_2" the source code > will still say "RC1". > > > > > > > Sorry Dan, there are a lot things missing in mavens release process, but > this very thing is imho not a problem with maven but with the weirdness of > SVN handling tags. If you make a svn:copy, then you _will_ > create_a_new_tag_! So pom.xml still contains exactly that what has been > released, and not only pom.xml, but _ALL_ release artifacts e.g. the > sources.tar.gz, etc. Renaming tags, moving tags etc is essentially a no-no > if you don't perform a build from that exact location afterwards. SVN > guaranties atomic operations - at least _almost_ always. And I've seen a lot > of weirdness in my last 20 years of using SCMs where this 'almost' did > matter a lot ;) If you have to make sure 100%, then you have to build from > the exact location. > > > > I agree that subversion tags are silly, and on many projects I own, I don't > use them; I just record the revision number in a wiki and call that a "tag."
But then the information is held in two places. An immutable tag does both for you: assuming the name is chosen properly, it documents what the revision contains as well as storing the revision number (last changed revision). I think it's a lot easier to find the source code for a particular version in SVN if it is associated with a tag. > With that said, I don't actually want to release a binary from one tag and > then copy to another. (I didn't mean to suggest that I wanted that in my > previous reply.) > > I just wish the source code files didn't contain a line saying "This is > RC3"; because then, when we decide that RC3 is final, I have to change the > code one last time to make it actually final. > > > > What's wrong with the maven-staging? You tag as if you do a release (with > exact that tag in SVN and pom.xml) but the results will not be deployed to > the final repo but only to a staging repo. Maybe I only missed that part of > the discussion, sorry for the noise then. > > > > To recap: Performing the release "as if" it were final is a wise > workaround, but when you use the release plugin to do it, it will create a > tag for you, which creates a riddle as to whether you want to call the tag > "_RC3" or whether you want to just give it the final name, forcing you to > modify the tag (delete/recreate) if RC4 is necessary. (The idea here being > that deleting/recreating tags is bad.) > > > -Dan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
