subject:"\[Lazarus\] Test the Lazarus fixes_0_9

Re: [Lazarus] Test the Lazarus fixes_0_9_30 branch

2011-02-16 Thread Lukasz Sokol

On 12/02/2011 16:13, Vincent Snijders wrote:

 It is only a RC branch until the release after that is a fixes branch.
 Maybe it would confuse people less, if it the branch is renamed, but I
 doubt that.
 
 Vincent
 

Yes it will confuse people less : look at Linux case - they have longterm, 
stable, rcX and
'bleeding-edge' or 'developer' branches reflected in names of releases... 
But this also comes with a policy what kind of patch is accepted into which 
release, 
and it is being, surprisingly, observed (surprisingly given the size and pace 
of development).

Lukasz



--
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Test the Lazarus fixes_0_9_30 branch

2011-02-16 Thread Vincent Snijders

2011/2/16 Lukasz Sokol el.es...@gmail.com:
 On 12/02/2011 16:13, Vincent Snijders wrote:

 It is only a RC branch until the release after that is a fixes branch.
 Maybe it would confuse people less, if it the branch is renamed, but I
 doubt that.

 Vincent


 Yes it will confuse people less : look at Linux case - they have longterm, 
 stable, rcX and
 'bleeding-edge' or 'developer' branches reflected in names of releases...
 But this also comes with a policy what kind of patch is accepted into which 
 release,
 and it is being, surprisingly, observed (surprisingly given the size and pace 
 of development).

Do they rename branches after a release? Or do they create just
another branch after a release, which means I will have to update the
build scripts or change branches to track on all the build servers?

Vincent

--
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Test the Lazarus fixes_0_9_30 branch

2011-02-16 Thread Lukasz Sokol

On 16/02/2011 10:44, Vincent Snijders wrote:

 Yes it will confuse people less : look at Linux case - they have longterm, 
 stable, rcX and
 'bleeding-edge' or 'developer' branches reflected in names of releases...
 But this also comes with a policy what kind of patch is accepted into which 
 release,
 and it is being, surprisingly, observed (surprisingly given the size and 
 pace of development).
 
 Do they rename branches after a release? Or do they create just
 another branch after a release, which means I will have to update the
 build scripts or change branches to track on all the build servers?
 
 Vincent

I guess whatever floats _your_ boat and gives the outcome people expect will do 
;)

(googled)
Oh, on http://linux.yyz.us/git-howto.html you can find this phrase:
The Linux kernel uses tags to for each kernel version [...]

So I guess they branch out for the development/bleeding edge branches, then 
merge back to 
head [trunk] and tag it.
And the stable patches get commited into tagged releases for which they are 
destined
(they do it by sending to the main head but also cc: stable IIUC)

I can't google more this time unfortunately, but it should be fairly easy to 
find.

Like I said - it is the outcome and whatever floats _your_ boat better, really.

Lukasz


--
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Test the Lazarus fixes_0_9_30 branch

2011-02-16 Thread John Stoneham

Can you clear this up for me?

Here's the way I understand it.
- Even numbers are reserved for stable releases: 0.9.28.2 is the current
stable release.
- Odd numbers are used for the development branch: 0.9.31 is the current svn
development branch. (Why isn't it 0.9.29 then?)
- Fixes branch is for locking features and fixing bugs before a stable
release, basically the RC branch. So fixes_0.9.30 is... wait, on the
snapshots page it says fixes_0.9.29. What happened to fixes_0.9.30?

So 0.9.31 in svn is what will eventually become the 0.9.32 stable release,
right? That means it contains things that are being developed beyond (and
will not be in) 0.9.30. And fixes_0.9.29 is what will be 0.9.30 stable,
correct? But at some point a few weeks ago (I assume before the fixes branch
was created) the svn branch was 0.9.30, wasn't it? And didn't this thread
start out calling the fixes branch fixes_0.9.30?

I don't know, I'm still confused. I guess the way I would do it, so that it
made sense to me, is to always have what will be the next stable release as
trunk. So trunk would now be numbered 0.9.29. And have a branch numbered
0.9.31 for the development version containing things that are being worked
on for a still future release. So when 0.9.30 is released, the branch
numbered 0.9.31 would then become trunk. When it gets close to the time to
release 0.9.32, branch off a development 0.9.33. And so on.

But that's just the way my mind works, which means it would make sense to me
but maybe not to someone else.

I think as long as there's a clear indication in the wiki about what the
numbering system means, then that should be sufficient.

-- 
John
--
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Test the Lazarus fixes_0_9_30 branch

2011-02-16 Thread Sven Barth


Am 16.02.2011 15:46, schrieb John Stoneham:

Can you clear this up for me?

Here's the way I understand it.
- Even numbers are reserved for stable releases: 0.9.28.2 is the current
stable release.
- Odd numbers are used for the development branch: 0.9.31 is the current
svn development branch. (Why isn't it 0.9.29 then?)


It was 0.9.29, but after the branch of the fixes_0.9.30 branch the new 
development version got the version 0.9.31.



- Fixes branch is for locking features and fixing bugs before a stable
release, basically the RC branch. So fixes_0.9.30 is... wait, on the
snapshots page it says fixes_0.9.29. What happened to fixes_0.9.30?



The snapshots are still compiled as 0.9.29, but they are from the 
fixes_0.9.30 branch (version of the branch and version of the 
application must not be the same).



So 0.9.31 in svn is what will eventually become the 0.9.32 stable
release, right? That means it contains things that are being developed
beyond (and will not be in) 0.9.30. And fixes_0.9.29 is what will be
0.9.30 stable, correct? But at some point a few weeks ago (I assume
before the fixes branch was created) the svn branch was 0.9.30, wasn't
it? And didn't this thread start out calling the fixes branch fixes_0.9.30?



The SVN structure is this:

|-\
| |_ fixes_0.9.28
|
|-\
| |_ fixes_0.9.30
|
trunk (aka 0.9.31)

The snapshot structure is this:
Lazarus 0.9.29 (aka 0.9.30, currently prepared for release)
Lazarus 0.9.31 (the current development version)


I don't know, I'm still confused. I guess the way I would do it, so that
it made sense to me, is to always have what will be the next stable
release as trunk. So trunk would now be numbered 0.9.29. And have a
branch numbered 0.9.31 for the development version containing things
that are being worked on for a still future release. So when 0.9.30 is
released, the branch numbered 0.9.31 would then become trunk. When it
gets close to the time to release 0.9.32, branch off a development
0.9.33. And so on.



trunk is always the main development version. All experimental features 
go in there. Then from time to time a release is branched from that 
trunk and stabilized.


Regards,
Sven

--
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Test the Lazarus fixes_0_9_30 branch

2011-02-16 Thread Vincent Snijders

2011/2/16 John Stoneham captnjamesk...@gmail.com:
Can you clear this up for me?
Here's the way I understand it.
- Even numbers are reserved for stable releases: 0.9.28.2 is the current
stable release.
Even last numbers are meant for releases. Those don't change.
- Odd numbers are used for the development branch: 0.9.31 is the current svn
development branch. (Why isn't it 0.9.29 then?)
Odd even last number means development version, i.e. there is not one
set of file that can be labeled 0.9.29 or 0.9.31. 0.9.29 is a
development version too.

- Fixes branch is for locking features and fixing bugs before a stable
release, basically the RC branch. So fixes_0.9.30 is... wait, on the
snapshots page it says fixes_0.9.29. What happened to fixes_0.9.30?

It says fixes branch that currently contains 0.9.29. The actual name
of the branch is fixes_0_9_30, because after the release of 0.9.30
from this branch, it will contain fixes for the 0.9.30 release.

So 0.9.31 in svn is what will eventually become the 0.9.32 stable release,
right? That means it contains things that are being developed beyond (and
will not be in) 0.9.30. And fixes_0.9.29 is what will be 0.9.30 stable,

fixes_0_9_30.

correct? But at some point a few weeks ago (I assume before the fixes branch
was created) the svn branch was 0.9.30, wasn't it? And didn't this thread

44 matches

Mail list logo