RE: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2

2001-04-12 Thread Filip Hanik
EMAIL PROTECTED] www.filip.net > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott > M Stark > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 4:39 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2 > >

Re: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2

2001-04-12 Thread Scott M Stark
- Original Message - From: "Filip Hanik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 4:04 PM Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2 > > Wouldn't it make more sense to call these tags Rel_2_2_0_a, Rel_

Re: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2

2001-04-12 Thread Scott M Stark
I would agree. It is a cleaner naming convention in my mind. > Bordet, Simone wrote: > > > My idea of using the Rel_x_y_z tags was related to merging only, so those > > tags are "internal" and go their way, separated from the JBoss_x_y_z tags > > that instead represent a "public" release. > >

RE: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2

2001-04-12 Thread Filip Hanik
> Wouldn't it make more sense to call these tags Rel_2_2_0_a, Rel_2_2_0_b, > then, after JBoss_2_2_1, Rel_2_2_1_a, Rel_2_2_1_b, etc? well, this discussion was brought up earlier, and it was determined to use a three digit version number. hence when you create a new release of version 2.2 (release

Re: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2

2001-04-12 Thread Toby Allsopp
Bordet, Simone wrote: > My idea of using the Rel_x_y_z tags was related to merging only, so those > tags are "internal" and go their way, separated from the JBoss_x_y_z tags > that instead represent a "public" release. > So, instead of moving the tag with 'cvs tag -F' I would then just make > ano

Re: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2

2001-04-12 Thread Scott M Stark
Yes that was clear, thanks. > > How does the Branch_2_2 tag always refer to the latest code > > on the branch? > > This is automatically done by CVS. > It is a little bit weird, but CVS works like this. The branch tag is a > "floating" tag, it always point to the most recent code on the branch,

RE: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2

2001-04-12 Thread marc fleury
TECTED]]On Behalf Of |Bordet, Simone |Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 5:21 AM |To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' |Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2 | | |Hey, | |> > > 1. Check out the 2.2.1 version: |> > > cvs co -r Rel_2_2_1 jboss |> > |> > I th

RE: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2

2001-04-12 Thread Bordet, Simone
Hey, > > > 1. Check out the 2.2.1 version: > > > cvs co -r Rel_2_2_1 jboss > > > > I think the best is to always checkout the most recent code > on the branch, > > so > > cvs co -rBranch_2_2 jboss > > > How does the Branch_2_2 tag always refer to the latest code > on the branch? This is auto

Re: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2

2001-04-12 Thread Scott M Stark
> > > > 1. Check out the 2.2.1 version: > > cvs co -r Rel_2_2_1 jboss > > I think the best is to always checkout the most recent code on the branch, > so > cvs co -rBranch_2_2 jboss > How does the Branch_2_2 tag always refer to the latest code on the branch? > > 4. Move the Rel_2_2_1 tag from

RE: [JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2

2001-04-12 Thread Bordet, Simone
Hey, > I integrated the JBossSX patched jars and tagged everything under > jboss with Rel_2_2_1 for now. If you have something that should > be integrated into the 2.2.1 release I believe the correct proceedure > is: > > 1. Check out the 2.2.1 version: > cvs co -r Rel_2_2_1 jboss I think the be

[JBoss-dev] Added Rel_2_2_1 tag to Branch_2_2

2001-04-11 Thread Scott M Stark
I integrated the JBossSX patched jars and tagged everything under jboss with Rel_2_2_1 for now. If you have something that should be integrated into the 2.2.1 release I believe the correct proceedure is: 1. Check out the 2.2.1 version: cvs co -r Rel_2_2_1 jboss 2. Make your changes ... 3. Commi