2010/1/12 Tim Starling <[email protected]>: > Another advantage is that we'd have a major version number that we can > say Wikimedia is running on. We had three deployments of 1.16 and > there may be a fourth before we branch it and start on 1.17, but these > branch points are unnamed. Instead we could call them 1.16wmf1, > 1.16wmf2 and 1.16wmf3 in Special:Version, and we could keep track of > when those updates were deployed, so that users would have a better > idea of how to talk about the software that we're running. > This part is what gets me excited most (sane version numbering), but not messing up the logs is also very nice.
> I've used svn switch a few times in other situations, and haven't > encountered any problems with it. As long as there are no uncommitted > patches in the live working copy, it should go ahead without a hitch. > That's my experience yes. However, there are currently 11 locally modified files in wmf-deployment, so that'd need to be cleaned up first. Roan Kattouw (Catrope) _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
