On 1/24/14, 4:34 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
On 1/24/14 12:37 PM, Andrew Edwards wrote:
On 1/24/14, 8:47 AM, Andrew Edwards wrote:
The branch will be renamed tonight in preparation for building beta
2. I will make this change
start building beta 2 at 10:00PM EST (UTC -5) so please ensure the
auto tester is not using the
release branch in order prevent any complications when it is
renamed. Also just to verify that I
am not causing any additional issues, the tags (aka version numbers)
for the release will be as
follows:
2.65.0-b2
I may not have been all there this morning when I wrote this
response. Here's what will be happening:
1) The "release" branch will be renamed "2.65.0"
2) The next tag will be "v2.65.0-b2"
3) The beta 1 tag will NOT be renamed.
The one question I have remaining is: Are there any issues with
removing the leading zero from the
minor release number? Should it be 2.065.0 instead?
Hopefully, with the answer to the previous question, this puts an end
to all discussions pertaining
to branching, tags, and naming contentions so we can focus on the
things that really matter.
Why not call the branch 2.065, like it was for a while and similar to
every other branch and build number we've used forever? It shouldn't
contain the trailing .0 as the branch is for the entire 2.065 series,
not just one build. I'm less concerned with the leading 0 in the
second tier, though that naming scheme has been used for the entire
life of the D project and would only cause problems if we somehow get
more than 999 releases. I see no reason to change it.
You got it. Lets put this horse to bed. 2.065 it is.
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
