On Monday October 24 2011 15:37:08 Garth N. Wells wrote: > On 24 October 2011 23:29, Johan Hake <johan.h...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Monday October 24 2011 14:53:41 Garth N. Wells wrote: > >> On 24 October 2011 22:11, Anders Logg <l...@simula.no> wrote: > >> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:14:43AM -0700, Johan Hake wrote: > >> >> On Monday October 24 2011 09:45:40 Garth N. Wells wrote: > >> >> > On 24 October 2011 17:35, Garth N. Wells <gn...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > >> >> > > On 24 October 2011 17:31, Garth N. Wells <gn...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > >> >> > >> On 24 October 2011 16:58, Anders Logg <l...@simula.no> wrote: > >> >> > >>> You mean follow Marie's suggestion but wait until we have > >> >> > >>> released 1.0-beta2? > >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> I don't really see the need to wait. > >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> I've registered a new series. The code is at > >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> https://code.launchpad.net/~dolfin-core/dolfin/dolfin-1.1 > >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> We can play around with how best to configure things. I had a > >> >> > >> look at a couple of projects on Launchpad to see how they do > >> >> > >> it. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Here are some examples: > >> >> > > > >> >> > > https://launchpad.net/unity > >> >> > > https://launchpad.net/inkscape > >> >> > > > >> >> > > I think that we should keep trunk for development, and each time > >> >> > > we get ready for a release series (1.0, 2.0, etc) create a new > >> >> > > series for it. > >> >> > > >> >> > I made tried a few small changes on Launchpad - take a look at the > >> >> > overview page. > >> >> > > >> >> > Note that the '1.0' branch is now > >> >> > > >> >> > lp:dolfin/1.0 > >> >> > > >> >> > lp:dolfin points automatically to the branch which is associated > >> >> > with the development series (which is now 1.1). > >> >> > >> >> Looks good! > >> >> > >> >> Not sure we should call the development branch 1.1 though. If we are > >> >> going to keep series for releases I think we can branch of a 1.1 > >> >> series once the release is in preparation. This series will then be > >> >> for backporting of bug fixes. > >> > > >> > Agree, the development branch should be called trunk. Then we branch > >> > off 1.1 when we get near release. > >> > >> Take a look now. > > > > Now it looks like there is one trunk and one 1.1 series. Is that correct? > > Yes. There is no 1.1 branch, but there is a 1.1 series and a milestone > so that we can target bugs and blueprints. We could also add a 1.2 > series. > > Once most targeted 1.1 bugs and blueprints are closed, we can create a > branch from trunk to prepare for release.
Ok, slowly getting there! Johan > Garth > > > Johan > > > >> Garth > >> > >> >> We then need a policy for what goes into 1.X.Y releases. > >> >> > >> >> I suggest that releases which brances from the development series > >> >> will get a bump in X and then Y is naturally set to 0. When there > >> >> are bug fixes in a 1.X series and we deside we should release a bug > >> >> fix for a stable sereies we bump Y for that series. > >> > > >> > Yes. So we might have 1.0.1, 1.0.2, 1.0.3 etc for some time and at the > >> > same time have 1.1.0, 1.1.1 etc. > >> > > >> > Something to consider is whether we want to make frequent releases > >> > from the development version. That's how we usually do things and it's > >> > good to get testing. Then we could use the old Linux kernel versioning > >> > (which is now abandonded) and release 1.1.0, 1.1.1, 1.1.3 (odd X) as > >> > development releases, and when we think 1.1.5 or so is good enough, we > >> > branch off 1.2.0. > >> > > >> > (Hmm... maybe it should be called 1.1 as Garth says if we use this > >> > scheme.) > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Anders > >> > > >> >> Johan > >> >> > >> >> > Garth > >> >> > > >> >> > > After 1.0 we want 2.x.x or 1.1.x? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Garth > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> Garth > >> >> > >> > >> >> > >>>> I suggest making the fork from the upcoming beta release, this > >> >> > >>>> gives a cleaner relation between branches. > >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> Martin > >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> Den 24. okt. 2011 kl. 15:53 skrev "Marie E. Rognes" > > > > <m...@simula.no>: > >> >> > >>>> > We seem to agree that it is time to split the dolfin-1.0 and > >> >> > >>>> > dolfin-dev development. > >> >> > >>>> > > >> >> > >>>> > Rather than splitting off new development to a -dev branch, > >> >> > >>>> > I would suggest splitting off 1.0 at this point, cf. the > >> >> > >>>> > suggestions in "Creating series" on > >> >> > >>>> > > >> >> > >>>> > https://help.launchpad.net/Projects/SeriesMilestonesReleases > >> >> > >>>> > > >> >> > >>>> > Yes/no? > >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >> >> > >>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > >> >> > >>>> Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net > >> >> > >>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > >> >> > >>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >> >> > >>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > >> >> > >>> Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net > >> >> > >>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > >> >> > >>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >> >> > > >> >> > _______________________________________________ > >> >> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > >> >> > Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net > >> >> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > >> >> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > >> Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net > >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
