This is exactly why I brought it up last time. There is obviously
something wrong when the people that are supposed to know better are
making mistakes? It is just confusing to have the branch there
it is not a branch just a temp place we worked wile packaging the
release.
I suggest
On 11/2/05, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suggest next time we are creating a milestone, preview or tag only
(unsupported) release, we don't create the temp branch in branches.
I respectfully disagree with this idea and my reasons are simple -
tags are meant to mark a point in time
On Nov 2, 2005, at 9:18 AM, Bruce Snyder wrote:
On 11/2/05, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suggest next time we are creating a milestone, preview or tag only
(unsupported) release, we don't create the temp branch in branches.
I respectfully disagree with this idea and my
On Nov 2, 2005, at 10:51 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
On Nov 2, 2005, at 9:18 AM, Bruce Snyder wrote:
On 11/2/05, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suggest next time we are creating a milestone, preview or tag only
(unsupported) release, we don't create the temp branch in branches.
On 11/2/05, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 2, 2005, at 9:18 AM, Bruce Snyder wrote:
On 11/2/05, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suggest next time we are creating a milestone, preview or tag only
(unsupported) release, we don't create the temp branch in
On Nov 2, 2005, at 11:19 AM, Bruce Snyder wrote:
On 11/2/05, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guys, you are totally agreeing. To paraphrase Dain, It should be
fine to create a branch from a tag, forget CVS dogma. To paraphrase
Bruce, If we need to updated a tag, move it to the
On 11/2/05, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One minor clarification. IMO, tags should remain intact forever.
Therefore a tag should be copied to the branches dir, not moved. But I
digress... ;-).
Awesome. That's my preference as well, just didn't want to be
inflexible and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
This is a good point. What if we moved the tag to a directory called
archived?
[Yes, I saw this in the original (*an* original?) proposal. :-)]
I feel that keeping the mnemonic is the first importance -- but
followed
I don't understand the harm of leaving the branches - it costs
nothing since it's already created, it keeps the history clear, and
it gives someone an opportunity in the future to work with it. I
know the probability of that is small, but people do weird things...
geir
On Oct 31, 2005,
The last nail in the coffin for me was when, in a sleep deprived
state, I got a little disoriented and built the M5 installer from the
branch directory rather than the tag directory. Accidents happen.
A simple svn copy cheaply creates a new branch, keeps it clear its
different than the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Tags imply that they are supported.
Really? I've never encountered that before. Maybe against a
V1_0_0 tage, but then you just tell someone 'nope, not supported.'
M1 means 'milestone one,' right?
Another thing to consider
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote, On 10/31/2005 1:32 PM:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Tags imply that they are supported.
Really? I've never encountered that before. Maybe against a
V1_0_0 tage, but then you just tell someone
Can we kill this old branch?
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/branches/1.0-M5
We have a tag for it here.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/tags/1_0_M5
And can we also agree that we don't leave branches hanging around
after every release unless that is planned to be an
+1
-dain
On Oct 31, 2005, at 6:06 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Can we kill this old branch?
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/branches/1.0-M5
We have a tag for it here.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/tags/1_0_M5
And can we also agree that we don't leave branches hanging
On 10/31/05, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can we kill this old branch?
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/branches/1.0-M5
We have a tag for it here.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/tags/1_0_M5
And can we also agree that we don't leave branches hanging around
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
That would not be a friendly way to go. I am arguing that we remove the
temptation.
And I'm arguing that revising history is unfriendly.
I would use this as an argument for removing milestone tags as quickly
as
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote, On 10/31/2005 7:09 PM:
A milestone represents a significant point in the development.
Until there's a released version that is feature- and bug-
compatible with what they're doing, a milestone reference
is better than anything else. Why would you want to remove
a
On Oct 31, 2005, at 9:48 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote, On 10/31/2005 7:09 PM:
A milestone represents a significant point in the development.
Until there's a released version that is feature- and bug-
compatible with what they're doing, a milestone reference
is
I think that we should remove the old tags, i.e. M1-M4.
Regards,
Alan
I would prefer if we didn't remove M4 yet, but it wouldn't bother me
to see M1-M3 go. On the other hand, I don't see why it benefits us to
remove them.
Aaron
On 10/29/05, Alan D. Cabrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that we should remove the old tags, i.e. M1-M4.
Regards,
Alan
Tags imply that they are supported. These are really just
self-consisistent snapshots that people can look at. I think that it's
a really bad idea to keep M4 around.
Regards,
Alan
Aaron Mulder wrote, On 10/29/2005 10:54 AM:
I would prefer if we didn't remove M4 yet, but it wouldn't
Good point. Maybe we should create an archived or unsupported
directory in tags that can hold these for historical purposes.
-dain
On Oct 29, 2005, at 11:04 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Tags imply that they are supported. These are really just self-
consisistent snapshots that people can
On 10/29/05, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good point. Maybe we should create an archived or unsupported
directory in tags that can hold these for historical purposes.
I disagree that the M1-M4 tags should be removed altogether. Tags are
nothing more than a marker for a point in time
23 matches
Mail list logo
