Before we have an idea for a transition plan, I would argue that we should have an implementation plan... As you mention, autoproj commit / autoproj tag have to be implemented prior to the release management changes.
Here comes the neverending question: who has the time ? Sylvain On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Jakob Schwendner <[email protected] > wrote: > Hi, > > Any ideas on a transition plan for these changes? I guess the autoproj > commit feature could be independent from having releases instead of our > master/next/stable cycle. > > Cheers, > > Jakob > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > > Behalf Of Sylvain Joyeux > > Sent: Dienstag, 1. Juli 2014 11:21 > > To: Steffen Planthaber > > Cc: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Rock-dev] Flavours, freezes, updates > > > > Thanks Steffen, your summary is IMO quite accurate. > > > > > > Using the tags you can easily find and reproduce former states of > the > > software. This is only true for a complete snapshot of all > packages, so > > it it only useful directly after a autoproj commit. Both can be > > combined > > into a single command > > > > > > They can, but they should not IMO. The same way than git commit and git > tag > > are two different things, I would keep autoproj commit and autoproj tag > > separate. If only to reuse prior knowledge about git. > > > > Sylvain > >
_______________________________________________ Rock-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.dfki.de/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/rock-dev
