Hi Allen, Looks good. Just one comment below.
Craig On Sep 14, 2006, at 9:33 AM, Allen Gilliland wrote:
I took another look at the release plan doc and it seems that we have already agreed about how the branches and trunk work. The only section I think is missing from that doc is "How to do a release". I'll go ahead and start that section and add whatever decisions we make.Just to summarize what we have discussed for this so far ... Creating a new release from the trunk: 1. do your work in the trunk2. when you think that it's worthy of release and the community agrees, then copy the trunk to a branch with the release number (i.e. branches/roller_3.0) and create an RC from that branch. 3. send out a link to the RC file. then the community evaluates and votes on that RC. 4. if changes are needed they are done in the trunk and merged into the release branch, then a new RC is created and we go back to step #3. 5. when an RC is approved by the community the branch is moved to a tag and the release goes out.Creating a patch release from an old version:1. copy the tagged release from tags/<release> to a branch with the new release number. i.e. tags/roller_2.1 -> branches/roller_2.1.12.
Merge fixes made since the release from the trunk to the newly created branch. If there are issues in the branch that are not relevant to the trunk, then...
do whatever fixing is needed in the newly created branch.3. when you think that it's ready for release and the community agrees, then create an RC from that branch. 4. send out a link to the RC file. then the community evaluates and votes on that RC.5. if changes are needed then go back to step #26. when an RC is approved by the community the branch is moved to a tag and the release goes out.does everyone agree that's how the release process should work? -- Allen Dave Johnson wrote:On 9/13/06, Allen Gilliland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:That sounds right to me, but I think branches/roller_2.x makes moresense. It's just a matter of convention, but I think that 2.x suggeststhat it's the ongoing branch for 2.x development, if there is any.Yes, 2.x is better.We should probably have a little bit of discussion about what we want for the standard way of trunk -> branch -> tag process. I don't think we have followed any strict conventions up until now, and it would benice to actually do that.This is the standing plan: http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=RollerReleasePlan+1 on everything you said, but I'm not so opposed to temporary tags asI suggest the repository is used like this ...long as they are cleaned up when no longer needed. - Dave
Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
