FYI - 1.6.x branch is back open for 1.6.2-SNAPSHOT work

[Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>]

I've pushed new commits to the 1.6.x branches in each repo, moving the
version to 1.6.2-SNAPSHOT, and the branches are back open again. If
something ends up biting us and we have to spin a new RC for
1.6.1-incubating, I'll just cut new 1.6.1 branches in each repo from the
rc3 tag, rather than keep using the 1.6.x branch forever. So - feel free to
start pushing 1.6.2-SNAPSHOT changes to the 1.6.x branches!

A.

Re: FYI - 1.6.x branch is back open for 1.6.2-SNAPSHOT work

[Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>]

I think diverging for particular releases off the 1.6.x line isn't a bad
thing - that's how I normally do releases of the big-ass projects here at
Cloudera.

A.

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Andrew Phillips <ap...@qrmedia.com>wrote:

> Quoting Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>:
>
>  I've pushed new commits to the 1.6.x branches in each repo, moving the
>> version to 1.6.2-SNAPSHOT, and the branches are back open again. If
>> something ends up biting us and we have to spin a new RC for
>> 1.6.1-incubating, I'll just cut new 1.6.1 branches in each repo from the
>> rc3 tag, rather than keep using the 1.6.x branch forever.
>>
>
> Hm...do we like the idea of having 1.6.x releases whose tags are not
> actually commits on the 1.6.x branch?
>
> Luckily it seems it's not going to come to that this time, and after all
> the hard work especially Andrew B. put it we hopefully won't be tying up
> 1.6.x or 1.7.x for that long again.
>
> Still, though, I'd personally prefer to have the releases come from
> commits on the branch.
>
> Regards
>
> ap
>

Re: FYI - 1.6.x branch is back open for 1.6.2-SNAPSHOT work

[Andrew Phillips <ap...@qrmedia.com>]

Quoting Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>:

> I've pushed new commits to the 1.6.x branches in each repo, moving the
> version to 1.6.2-SNAPSHOT, and the branches are back open again. If
> something ends up biting us and we have to spin a new RC for
> 1.6.1-incubating, I'll just cut new 1.6.1 branches in each repo from the
> rc3 tag, rather than keep using the 1.6.x branch forever.

Hm...do we like the idea of having 1.6.x releases whose tags are not  
actually commits on the 1.6.x branch?

Luckily it seems it's not going to come to that this time, and after  
all the hard work especially Andrew B. put it we hopefully won't be  
tying up 1.6.x or 1.7.x for that long again.

Still, though, I'd personally prefer to have the releases come from  
commits on the branch.

Regards

ap