Hi, My 2c from the gallery. I'm not involved in CouchDB, so just making general observations from the perspective of other Apache projects interested in using Git.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Paul Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > As Noah points out, there are ASF procedural issues that affect this > discussion. Part of making a release involves getting community input > on whether the release is a valid artefact. As such we need to be able > to refer to these "not-release" sets of bytes. I'd say that's a perfectly valid use of tags. An official release should be backed by a tag, but there's no requirement for the reverse. Using tags for release candidates or other milestones should also be fine. It should be up to each project to decide how they want to name and manage tags. I also find the idea of renaming a release tag after the vote completes a bit troublesome. The way I see it, a release manager will tag a given state of the source tree and use that tag to build the release candidate. After that no repository changes should be required regardless of the result of the release vote. If the vote passes, the candidate packages are pushed to www.apache.org/dist as-is. Otherwise the release candidate is just dropped and the next one made. This kind of a workflow also solves the "1.1.1 vs. 1.1.1-rc1" problem. If each release candidate is given a separate new tag and version number (i.e. "1.1.1 vs 1.1.2"), then there can be no confusion about which build is being tested. Version numbers are cheap. BR, Jukka Zitting
