On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 2:04 AM, Dustin Sallings <[email protected]> wrote: > > v1.7.4.4 Git 1.7.4.4 >> v1.7.4.5 Git 1.7.4.5 >> v1.7.5 Git 1.7.5 >> v1.7.5-rc0 Git 1.7.5-rc0 >> v1.7.5-rc1 Git 1.7.5-rc1 >> v1.7.5-rc2 Git 1.7.5-rc2 >> v1.7.5-rc3 Git 1.7.5-rc3 >> v1.7.5.1 Git 1.7.5.1 >> v1.7.5.2 Git 1.7.5.2 >> v1.7.5.3 Git 1.7.5.3 >> v1.7.5.4 Git 1.7.5.4 >> v1.7.6 Git 1.7.6 >> v1.7.6-rc0 Git 1.7.6-rc0 >> v1.7.6-rc1 Git 1.7.6-rc1 >> v1.7.6-rc2 Git 1.7.6-rc2 >> v1.7.6-rc3 Git 1.7.6-rc3 >> v1.7.6.1 Git 1.7.6.1 >> v1.7.7-rc0 Git 1.7.7-rc0 >> >> I very well may be biased, but I don't find that confusing. > > > Oh, and by extension, I will give my -1 vote to any system that mixes these > two together. The release tag for X.Y.Z should be tied to an official > artefact of the Apache CouchDB project. A tag that doesn't pass the vote > should be deleted. The history is in the X.Y.x release branch. It has no > business cluttering up the tags, and no business confusing users about > whether it has been blessed by the project. >
Hear hear. My thoughts on this were to try and add a simple convention to enforce this. Merely by prefixing anything with "rel/" that would signal an 'official blessing' on the subject in question. There are any number of ways to do this, and I'm quite open to hearing alternatives, but this is exactly what I was aiming at. We need a procedural/community thing that says "these over here are pristine, these over here are us fucking about." In my slap dashery I chose the "rel/" prefix. There are definitely other solutions, but I think Noah has hit the nail on the head in pointing out the underlying need that we should be discussing.
