Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
> Isn't the convention way to omit the last zero? This has been done for > Maven and all plugins/components before. > No, we have 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 for the Maven core distro. Plugins would/could be a different story though. /Anders > > Mike > > > > --**--**- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
On 16 July 2013 09:44, Fred Cooke wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Chris Graham wrote: > >> Michael's point about omiting the trailing .0 is valid, and introducing it >> now does not follow the established convention. >> Is it going to be cleaned up? >> > > I sincerely hope not! That would involve potential for confusion should > anyone have fetched the old and now "deleted" (only in the apache copy!) > tag. Let the sleeping dog lie and improve the process to avoid it in future. > +1 Now that it is published, you have to live with it. Is the versioning convention documented anywhere? >> -Chris >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Arnaud Héritier > >wrote: >> >> > lol >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY > > >wrote: >> > >> > > uh, another bot? >> > > >> > > Le lundi 15 juillet 2013 22:28:26 Fred Cooke a écrit : >> > > > What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo >> right. >> > > If >> > > > you have a unique coordinate, you're good for life, no matter what >> gets >> > > > done to the SCM. (more or less) >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Arnaud Héritier < >> aherit...@gmail.com >> > > >wrote: >> > > > > done >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl >> > wrote: >> > > > > > Sure, drop the older one. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier < >> aherit...@gmail.com> >> > > > > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > Hi Jason, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and >> > > > > >> > > > > maven-3.1.0 >> > > > > >> > > > > > > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one >> > (893ca28 >> > > - >> > > > > >> > > > > 28th >> > > > > >> > > > > > > June) ? >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Cheers, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > - >> > > > > > > Arnaud Héritier >> > > > > > > http://aheritier.net >> > > > > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com >> > > > > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Jason >> > > > > > >> > > > > > -- >> > > > > > Jason van Zyl >> > > > > > Founder, Apache Maven >> > > > > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl >> > > > > > - >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.) >> > > > > >> > > > > -- >> > > > > - >> > > > > Arnaud Héritier >> > > > > http://aheritier.net >> > > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com >> > > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier >> > > >> > > - >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > - >> > Arnaud Héritier >> > http://aheritier.net >> > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com >> > Twitter/Skype : aheritier >> > >> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Chris Graham wrote: > Michael's point about omiting the trailing .0 is valid, and introducing it > now does not follow the established convention. > Is it going to be cleaned up? > I sincerely hope not! That would involve potential for confusion should anyone have fetched the old and now "deleted" (only in the apache copy!) tag. Let the sleeping dog lie and improve the process to avoid it in future. > -Chris > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Arnaud Héritier >wrote: > > > lol > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY > >wrote: > > > > > uh, another bot? > > > > > > Le lundi 15 juillet 2013 22:28:26 Fred Cooke a écrit : > > > > What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo > right. > > > If > > > > you have a unique coordinate, you're good for life, no matter what > gets > > > > done to the SCM. (more or less) > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Arnaud Héritier < > aherit...@gmail.com > > > >wrote: > > > > > done > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl > > wrote: > > > > > > Sure, drop the older one. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier < > aherit...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Jason, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and > > > > > > > > > > maven-3.1.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one > > (893ca28 > > > - > > > > > > > > > > 28th > > > > > > > > > > > > June) ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > Arnaud Héritier > > > > > > > http://aheritier.net > > > > > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > > > > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jason van Zyl > > > > > > Founder, Apache Maven > > > > > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.) > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > - > > > > > Arnaud Héritier > > > > > http://aheritier.net > > > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > - > > Arnaud Héritier > > http://aheritier.net > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > >
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
I'm not in favor to recreate a maven-3.1 tag to avoid confusions and we need to keep the maven-3.1.0 which was used in the release But I agree to improve our release/RCs/Staging process as far as it remains as automated as possible. It is already complexe to release stuffs on Apache side and I don't want to add more complexity without a good added-value in return On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Chris Graham wrote: > Michael's point about omiting the trailing .0 is valid, and introducing it > now does not follow the established convention. > Is it going to be cleaned up? > -Chris > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Arnaud Héritier >wrote: > > > lol > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY > >wrote: > > > > > uh, another bot? > > > > > > Le lundi 15 juillet 2013 22:28:26 Fred Cooke a écrit : > > > > What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo > right. > > > If > > > > you have a unique coordinate, you're good for life, no matter what > gets > > > > done to the SCM. (more or less) > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Arnaud Héritier < > aherit...@gmail.com > > > >wrote: > > > > > done > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl > > wrote: > > > > > > Sure, drop the older one. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier < > aherit...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Jason, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and > > > > > > > > > > maven-3.1.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one > > (893ca28 > > > - > > > > > > > > > > 28th > > > > > > > > > > > > June) ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > Arnaud Héritier > > > > > > > http://aheritier.net > > > > > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > > > > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jason van Zyl > > > > > > Founder, Apache Maven > > > > > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.) > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > - > > > > > Arnaud Héritier > > > > > http://aheritier.net > > > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > - > > Arnaud Héritier > > http://aheritier.net > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > -- - Arnaud Héritier http://aheritier.net Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com Twitter/Skype : aheritier
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
Michael's point about omiting the trailing .0 is valid, and introducing it now does not follow the established convention. Is it going to be cleaned up? -Chris On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > lol > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY >wrote: > > > uh, another bot? > > > > Le lundi 15 juillet 2013 22:28:26 Fred Cooke a écrit : > > > What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo right. > > If > > > you have a unique coordinate, you're good for life, no matter what gets > > > done to the SCM. (more or less) > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Arnaud Héritier > >wrote: > > > > done > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl > wrote: > > > > > Sure, drop the older one. > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Jason, > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and > > > > > > > > maven-3.1.0 > > > > > > > > > > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one > (893ca28 > > - > > > > > > > > 28th > > > > > > > > > > June) ? > > > > > > > > > > > > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > Arnaud Héritier > > > > > > http://aheritier.net > > > > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > > > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Jason van Zyl > > > > > Founder, Apache Maven > > > > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.) > > > > > > > > -- > > > > - > > > > Arnaud Héritier > > > > http://aheritier.net > > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > -- > - > Arnaud Héritier > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier >
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
lol On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote: > uh, another bot? > > Le lundi 15 juillet 2013 22:28:26 Fred Cooke a écrit : > > What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo right. > If > > you have a unique coordinate, you're good for life, no matter what gets > > done to the SCM. (more or less) > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Arnaud Héritier >wrote: > > > done > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > > > Sure, drop the older one. > > > > > > > > On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Jason, > > > > > > > > > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and > > > > > > maven-3.1.0 > > > > > > > > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 > - > > > > > > 28th > > > > > > > > June) ? > > > > > > > > > > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > Arnaud Héritier > > > > > http://aheritier.net > > > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jason van Zyl > > > > Founder, Apache Maven > > > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > > > > - > > > > > > > > Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.) > > > > > > -- > > > - > > > Arnaud Héritier > > > http://aheritier.net > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- - Arnaud Héritier http://aheritier.net Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com Twitter/Skype : aheritier
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
uh, another bot? Le lundi 15 juillet 2013 22:28:26 Fred Cooke a écrit : > What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo right. If > you have a unique coordinate, you're good for life, no matter what gets > done to the SCM. (more or less) > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > > done > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > > Sure, drop the older one. > > > > > > On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier > > > > wrote: > > > > Hi Jason, > > > > > > > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and > > > > maven-3.1.0 > > > > > > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - > > > > 28th > > > > > > June) ? > > > > > > > > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > - > > > > Arnaud Héritier > > > > http://aheritier.net > > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > -- > > > Jason van Zyl > > > Founder, Apache Maven > > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > > > - > > > > > > Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.) > > > > -- > > - > > Arnaud Héritier > > http://aheritier.net > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
maven 3.1 : a47ef06832bff888928c66c525e18439b7a3c0f3 (June 23rd) maven 3.1.0 : 893ca28a1da9d5f51ac03827af98bb730128f9f2 (June 28th) On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Fred Cooke wrote: > What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo right. If > you have a unique coordinate, you're good for life, no matter what gets > done to the SCM. (more or less) > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Arnaud Héritier >wrote: > > > done > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > > > > Sure, drop the older one. > > > > > > On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Jason, > > > > > > > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and > > maven-3.1.0 > > > > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - > > 28th > > > > June) ? > > > > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > - > > > > Arnaud Héritier > > > > http://aheritier.net > > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > -- > > > Jason van Zyl > > > Founder, Apache Maven > > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > > > - > > > > > > Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > - > > Arnaud Héritier > > http://aheritier.net > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > -- - Arnaud Héritier http://aheritier.net Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com Twitter/Skype : aheritier
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo right. If you have a unique coordinate, you're good for life, no matter what gets done to the SCM. (more or less) On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > done > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > > Sure, drop the older one. > > > > On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier > wrote: > > > > > Hi Jason, > > > > > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and > maven-3.1.0 > > > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - > 28th > > > June) ? > > > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > - > > > Arnaud Héritier > > > http://aheritier.net > > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jason > > > > -- > > Jason van Zyl > > Founder, Apache Maven > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > > - > > > > Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > - > Arnaud Héritier > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier >
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
done On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > Sure, drop the older one. > > On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > > > Hi Jason, > > > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and maven-3.1.0 > > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - 28th > > June) ? > > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > > > Cheers, > > > > - > > Arnaud Héritier > > http://aheritier.net > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > Thanks, > > Jason > > -- > Jason van Zyl > Founder, Apache Maven > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > - > > Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.) > > > > > > > -- - Arnaud Héritier http://aheritier.net Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com Twitter/Skype : aheritier
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
Agreed, but as discussed the nicer appaoach would be to use tags in the form 3.1.0-0...N and then point the final tag at the hash pointed to by the successful spin's tag, if you insist on this whole respinning thing. On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > Sure, drop the older one. > > On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > > > Hi Jason, > > > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and maven-3.1.0 > > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - 28th > > June) ? > > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > > > Cheers, > > > > - > > Arnaud Héritier > > http://aheritier.net > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > Thanks, > > Jason > > -- > Jason van Zyl > Founder, Apache Maven > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > - > > Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.) > > > > > > >
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
Sure, drop the older one. On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > Hi Jason, > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and maven-3.1.0 > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - 28th > June) ? > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > Cheers, > > - > Arnaud Héritier > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl - Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.)
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Fred Cooke wrote: > 10/10 to Jason for not reusing the existing tag name! <3 > I didn't say I was against to use different tags for each release attempt :-) But what do we do with old tags ? >From my point of view we have to remove them to avoid confusions especially in that case where names aren't really freestanding WDYT ? > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier >wrote: > > > Hi Jason, > > > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and > maven-3.1.0 > > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - > 28th > > June) ? > > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > > > Cheers, > > > > - > > Arnaud Héritier > > http://aheritier.net > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > > -- - Arnaud Héritier http://aheritier.net Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com Twitter/Skype : aheritier
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
Am 2013-07-15 20:57, schrieb Arnaud Héritier: Hi Jason, It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and maven-3.1.0 I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - 28th June) ? I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? Cheers, Isn't the convention way to omit the last zero? This has been done for Maven and all plugins/components before. Mike - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
10/10 to Jason for not reusing the existing tag name! <3 On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > Hi Jason, > > It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and maven-3.1.0 > I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - 28th > June) ? > I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? > > Cheers, > > - > Arnaud Héritier > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier >
tags maven-3.1 vs maven-3.1.0
Hi Jason, It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and maven-3.1.0 I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - 28th June) ? I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ? Cheers, - Arnaud Héritier http://aheritier.net Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com Twitter/Skype : aheritier
