> On 10. May 2023, at 20:37, Gilbert Barmwater <gi...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > On 5/10/2023 1:27 PM, Rick McGuire wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 12:22 PM ooRexx <oor...@jonases.se >> <mailto:oor...@jonases.se>> wrote: >> I am sorry but I have to come back to this item: >> >>>>> What is the difference between the milestones 5.0.0, 5.0.1 and 5.1.0? >>>>> >>>>> That indicates which release the change is going to ship on. Since the >>>>> 5.0.0 has already been released, that should never be used again. 5.0.1 >>>>> would be a release that will contain only bug fixes to 5.0.0. The 5.1.0 >>>>> release will contain new content, as well as bug fixes to 5.0.0 content. >>>>> Bug fixes like this one should be applied to both the trunk and the 5.0.1 >>>>> branch and the 5.0.1 milestone used. >>>>> >> >> Currently we do not have a 5.0.1 branch in SVN, so it is not possible to >> commit anything specifically to 5.0.1; all go into trunk which is then >> uploaded to 5.1.0beta on sourceforge. >> Sigh, it looks like an important item got deleted from the release process >> check list. I know I highlighted this when we were starting up. At the point >> where the release candidate gets moved from branches to releases, a copy >> should have been made in branches with the fix level incremented (e.g. 5.0.0 >> -> 5.0.1). That branch also gets the changes made to change the build number >> to the matching level. The only updates allowed to that branch are big fixes >> we wish to ship in a bug-fix release. No new features can be added to this >> branch. It would be nice if bug fixes get applied to both trunk and the bug >> fix branch at the same time, but it is not necessary. If we choose to ship a >> bug-fix release, we can review all of the pending bugs in trunk and apply >> the changes to the bug-fix branch as part of the release process. > It seems to me that we should immediately correct this omission and create a > 5.0.1 branch. I will let others decide if it should be > ...main/releases/5.0.1 or ...main/releases/5.0.1/trunk. It should be copied > from ...main/releases/5.0.0 and the necessary changes made to reflect that > the build number is 5.0.1. (Perhaps it needs to be in /branches until it is > ready for release?) Then we need to review all the bug fixes in 5.1.0 and > apply them to 5.0.1. As far as deciding to do a 5.0.1 release goes, I feel > that there are some significant things that have been fixed that this is > warranted. And it allows us to "correct" the missing pieces in 5.0.0 in a > "clean" way as well. > > Gil > I agree that the 5.0.1 should be created, now when I know how it was intended but we should at the same time agree on who does what. I can agree to take care of Jenkins and the changes necessary to the build system but I will not be able or willing to do any kind of SVN branching off, I would feel safer if Rick and/or Erich agree to take on that part. I will then go through all the things I have found so far and apply them in both places and I expect all others to do the same with “their” bugs. I guess one would need to keep 2 separate local SVN repositories then.
Before any attempt is made at a new release I need to sort out what went wrong the last time and find a way to automate the transition. I have some ideas, when they are ready I will put them in the document Rick set up. There is like a zillion things to change so the only way to do it is to automate it. /P.O. >> >> >> >> Are you saying that we should have branched off a 5.0.1 from 5.0.0? Where >> should it have gone? Into >> svn.code.sf.net/p/oorexx/code-0/main/branches/5.0.1? >> <http://svn.code.sf.net/p/oorexx/code-0/main/branches/5.0.1?> >> >> I also looked at the revisions of all the twigs of .../oorexx/code-0/main/ >> and it seems that although we froze 5.0.0 on revision 12583 there are >> commits up to revision 12601, unclear how that can happen. >> >> 5.0.0 was branched off as <…>main/releases/5.0.0 whereas 4.2 and before were >> branched off as <…>main/releases/4.2.0/trunk, is this significant in any way? >> >> That was a mistake really. It just reflected how/where the copy was made >> from. >> >> >> Can all changes (5.0.1 and 5.1.0) stay in trunk? >> >> All changes should be made to trunk. As I mentioned earlier, it would be >> nice if they would also get applied to 5.0.1, but that can be sorted out >> when the decision is made to make a bug-fix release. >> >> Rick >> >> >>> Oorexx-devel mailing list >>> Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> <mailto:Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel >>> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oorexx-devel mailing list >> Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> <mailto:Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel >> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oorexx-devel mailing list >> Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> <mailto:Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel >> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel> > _______________________________________________ > Oorexx-devel mailing list > Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
_______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
