On Nov 12, 2006, at 1:46 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
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.
Ahh ... understood.
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.
