> On Nov 12, 2006, at 1:26 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote: > > > I think that the issue is that the thing that is voted on > is the tag. > > Is that actually right? My understanding was that the thing that is > voted on is the artifacts (in this case, the binary and source zip > archives), and that the VCS is not a fundamental part of the release > voting process.
I guess I meant "the thing that is voted on is what was built from the tag." Assuming that development continues, then if you work from the tag, people only need to consider the differences that have happened on the tag. If we build from the mainline, then people need to consider all changes. > > Additional work might be happening as the vote proceeds; that > > additional > > work may or may not be ready for prime-time. > > > > I expect that over time, we'll be branching earlier anyways > and doing > > destabilizing work on a branch separate from the release candidate > > branch. > > True, but my question is whether we should make branches for > the sole > purpose of cutting a release or not, which is why I was wondering if > actually saves effort or not. My understanding is that tags and branches are the same thing in svn, so Craig's proposal was that the work of fixing things would happen in the dir created for the tag, and then get merged (or duplicated) into mainline. Consider, for example, my localizer optimization, Abe's nested subquery fixes, and my JDK1.4 switchover. Those all happened after the tag was created. If we include those changes in the thing that we vote on next, then presumably I should take those changes into account (including testing to make sure that the new JDK1.4 stuff really works, etc.) when voting. I'd prefer to just automatically saying "+1" since I gave a +1 last time and the changes you made to resolve Eddie's issues are things that I agree with. For the particular issues at hand, I don't think that there is much destabilization, but I do agree that jumping back to current main and re-tagging seems like it's bound to cause problems at some point. It seems like once there's a 0.9.6 tag, we shouldn't be changing the number of the mainline back to 0.9.6, but should instead change things in the tag. Speaking of which, is there a way in svn to freeze a directory, so that once 0.9.6 is approved, we can't mutate that tag / branch / directory? -Patrick _______________________________________________________________________ Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
