On 10/7/18 12:22 AM, Neil C Smith wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, 6 Oct 2018, 21:16 Antonio Vieiro, <[email protected]> wrote:
For 9.0 we could use a branch named "9.0-vc3" (same as the tag in
incubator-netbeans).
I'm not sure I understand the reasoning for branching like that? Surely we
could just as easily tag master? What's your thoughts behind it? It might
make sense if the docs were at the root in all branches except asf-site I
guess, but I personally dislike unrelated branches like that. I was really
going for the simplest and quickest approach here for immediate needs.
The idea is to avoid having too many files in the master branch. If each
release delivers about 12k files and we have 10 releases then that would
mean having 120k files in the master branch. That's going burn my SSD.
I'd rather have 10 branches with 12k files each than a single master
branch with 120k files.
Of course, the asf-site will have to have 120k files, but you don't
usually checkout that branch (jenkins does that instead for publishing).
OTOH I understand it's easier for ASF Infra to hold the javadoc on a git
repo, but I don't like that. I'd rather have a directory where the
javadoc is uploaded and then published.
It also reminds me, we should really have a 9.0 tag for that 9.0-vc3 commit
in the main repo too.
In fact we could update the jenkins release job
to push the javadoc to this new repo as well. And so on with the rest
of releases.
That's the next step I believe. But at the moment I'm not sure the
templates are set up for that. I'd really like to understand better how
release Javadocs were done before. IMO we should do this manually for 9 and
10, and then have another look.
Agreed.
Kind regards,
Antonio
Best wishes,
Neil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
