Brian Aker wrote:
Hi!
On Feb 25, 2009, at 1:50 AM, Eric Herman wrote:
It doesn't address Stewart's concern you to determine "intended
stable at a glance" and issues with bzr rev numbers have already been
discussed.
The bzr rev numbers are stable by policy. Each incoming set of commits
go to trunk as a unit. So our numbers are stable.
For me I really like this because someone can say "I am having a
problem with 893", and I can just:
bzr branch -r 893
I'm certainly not an expert in this area, but I would say the last 5
years or so of version control systems has shown it's an evolving
space. It wouldn't be bad to have a revision in something, but isn't it
perhaps better to tie it to something more logical?
I can see exactly what they have, and I don't have to be concerned
about trying to relate back tags (which are crummy pieces of meta data).
As far as major.minor numbers go... I am not much of a fan of them
either.... though they work really well for this system if we branch
off for versions in the future. AKA Drizzle is mainline and
distributions are built around patched versions of our main branch.
Not suggesting it, but 0.1-r893 accomplishes the same thing and most
people know what "0.1" generally implies in terms of release stability.
- Matt
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
