Hash: SHA1

Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 September 2009, Reinout van Rees wrote:
>> On 2009-09-11, Martijn Faassen <faas...@startifact.com> wrote:
>>> Jim Fulton wrote:
>>>> but if it is, I
>>>> propose to using 0 instead of the dev of the next version.  Where I've
>>>> used '0', I've found it to be less error prone.  Ir also requires less
>>>> effort because it means you never have to edit the version on the
>>>> trunk.
>>> I'm -1 to using 0.
>> -1
> -1 from me too. Having the previous version avoids having to look it up in 
> CHANGES.txt or the tags, which is really lame if you do lots of releasing.

If you are making releases without having the CHANGES.txt open in your
browser, then you need to put down the keyboard and back away slowly, so
that nobody gets hurt.  Reviewing / correcting the changelog (and
comparing it with a diff from the last release) should be a fundamental
part of making a release.  At the very minimum, you're supposed to
update the release date in the changelog, right?

I *like* the property of the "0" strategy that it makes the job of
releasing a package a little harder:  releaseing software should be a
thoughtful, careful process, not something you do without a bit of
hesitation and review.

- --
Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tsea...@palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to