On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Leif Hedstrom <l...@ogre.com> wrote:
> > On Aug 12, 2013, at 3:40 PM, Igor Galić <i.ga...@brainsware.org> wrote > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> > >>> e currently merge master into a dev branch to make a dev release. I > feel > >> like master and dev should be synonymous. > > > > I never quite understood why Leif felt the need to create a (temporary) > > -dev release branch. (but then I'm only starting to comprehend git) > > That was a mistake. However, the 3.3.x branch had a real purpose for my > RM'ing, just as the "4.x" branch in the WIki propopsal: > > Imagine that you are making a release out of Master. You "git pull" it, > look at the changes (hopefully), make some tests, build it, etc., maybe fix > a bug or two. In the mean time, Phil commits 100 changes to master. What do > you tag now for your release? > > Granted you can tag as soon as you start your process, and as you make > changes, fixes or whatever, you retag accordingly. The 3.3.x branch was > made to make this process easier. > > To be honest, I don't care about this at all. The 3.3.x branch was a tool > to make my life easier, if other RMs have better tools or other > methodologies, by all means, use those. Neither of the proposals or changes > depend on this, and I hope we can avoid getting hung up on technicalities > on how git works ;). > > > > >> Ifor software of this nature. 1 a year is maybe too little from a > >> features/progress standpoint. Doing a minor (3.4 to 3.6) bump 2 or 3 > times > >> a year seems reasonable to me. Probably closer to 2. > > > > really? even two seems too much to me, but maybe growing up with httpd > > I'm thinking too conservatively. > > Fwiw, we had these discussions early on, and the general consensus was the > releasing early and often was the way to go. We can change that, it's what > a healthy community is all about. Fwiw, HTTPD releases fairly often: 25 > releases of v2.2 and already 6 releases for v2.4. The latter is roughly 4 > releases per year (2.4.0 was released early 2012, right ?). What I think > HTTPD did different was very long times between major relies (v2.2 to v2.4). > > I think I just had an epiphany about your proposal. I think there are two pieces here that combined have confused me, and maybe others. You'd like to make more stable "micro" releases, up to 4 times a year. Then you'd also like to roll the micro release number into the minor number. So instead of 3.4.1 we just have 3.5. Or am I even further in the weeds now? > Cheers, > > -- leif > >
