You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@qpid.apache.org by Rajith Attapattu <ra...@gmail.com> on 2010/01/06 21:29:37 UTC
Tagging our releases
I was just trying to quickly figure out the svn rev the Java 0.5
release and found that there wasn't a tag available for it.
(please note we do have a branch for it, but I still think we should
be tagging the final release).
It seems we have tags for the previous releases (all though some
aren't explicitly named).
I thinks its good practise to tag releases. Some of the previous
releases even had tags for RC's as well.
So lets make sure we tag the final release for 0.6
Regards,
Rajith Attapattu
Red Hat
http://rajith.2rlabs.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
RE: Tagging our releases
Posted by Andrew Stitcher <as...@redhat.com>.
I think I agree with all you said there - except it doesn't explain why
we've got 3 branches for 0.5 -
0.5-release
0.5.x-dev
0.5-fix
And of course I can't tell fro svn what relationship (if any) these
branches have to each other.
Andrew
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 22:28 +0000, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> Oh, and I forgot to add that I think Tag names should just be the direct version number, e.g. simply M4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.6.1 etc
>
> Robbie
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robbie Gemmell [mailto:robbie.gemmell@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 06 January 2010 22:22
> > To: dev@qpid.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: Tagging our releases
> >
> > As far as I understand, the rationale for creating the 0.X-release
> > branch is just so that trunk can be unfrozen and any blockers committed
> > back to the branch. When releases drag on like M4 and 0.5 did it is
> > quite annoying having trunk frozen.
> >
> > We could as easily use the same temporary branch name for all such
> > release scenarios, or create new ones for each release and then delete
> > it when we are done with the release, as the eventual release Tag would
> > serve as marker enough after that point. Alternatively, create a 0.X.x
> > branch as the first 0.X release is completed and then leave it in place
> > for any future micro revisions.
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Andrew Stitcher [mailto:astitcher@redhat.com]
> > > Sent: 06 January 2010 22:15
> > > To: dev@qpid.apache.org
> > > Subject: RE: Tagging our releases
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 21:51 +0000, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> > > > Shall we retroactively create a 0.5 tag for future usage? Andrews
> > > suggestion of looking at the .svnrevision file doesn't work for 0.5
> > as
> > > it reports HEAD.
> > >
> > > Oh - I think retroactively creating the tag would be useful.
> > >
> > > Thinking a little about it -I think our 0.5 branch/tag naming is
> > > broken:
> > >
> > > IMNSHO We should have a single 0.6 _branch_ and every release from it
> > > should be tagged. Leading to something like:
> > >
> > > branches/0.6
> > > tags/0.6-release
> > > tags/0.6.1-release
> > > etc.
> > >
> > > The only work that should happen on the 0.6 branch would be related
> > to
> > > a
> > > later release of the 0.6 line so I can't see the point of a 0.6-
> > release
> > > branch (but I created it following the example from 0.5).
> > >
> > > So now I'm a bit stuck for tag names! I don't want to duplicate the
> > > branch name as it will confuse things.
> > >
> > > Suggestions?
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I just noticed from the users list why Rajith wanted to know the
> > > revision, and he understandably got the wrong revision from looking
> > at
> > > the 0.5-release branch. It doesn't change the outcome discussed as no
> > > code was changed, but the noted rev 779632 was actually an error on
> > my
> > > part after 0.5 was produced (due to a partially-switched SVN
> > checkout)
> > > and 0.5 was released at rev 775777 as far as I can tell.
> > > >
> > > > Robbie
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Andrew Stitcher [mailto:astitcher@redhat.com]
> > > > > Sent: 06 January 2010 21:26
> > > > > To: dev@qpid.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: Tagging our releases
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 15:29 -0500, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> > > > > > I was just trying to quickly figure out the svn rev the Java
> > 0.5
> > > > > > release and found that there wasn't a tag available for it.
> > > > > > (please note we do have a branch for it, but I still think we
> > > should
> > > > > > be tagging the final release).
> > > > > > It seems we have tags for the previous releases (all though
> > some
> > > > > > aren't explicitly named).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I thinks its good practise to tag releases. Some of the
> > previous
> > > > > > releases even had tags for RC's as well.
> > > > > > So lets make sure we tag the final release for 0.6
> > > > >
> > > > > I fully intend to tag the 0.6 release when I make it.
> > > > >
> > > > > However note that you can find a releases svn revision by looking
> > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > *.svnrevision file in the distribution directory - obviously this
> > > is
> > > > > not
> > > > > massively convenient.
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> > > --
> > > > > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> > > > > Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> > > > > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> > > > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> > > > Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> > > > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> > > Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> > > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
> >
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
RE: Tagging our releases
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
Oh, and I forgot to add that I think Tag names should just be the direct version number, e.g. simply M4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.6.1 etc
Robbie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robbie Gemmell [mailto:robbie.gemmell@gmail.com]
> Sent: 06 January 2010 22:22
> To: dev@qpid.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Tagging our releases
>
> As far as I understand, the rationale for creating the 0.X-release
> branch is just so that trunk can be unfrozen and any blockers committed
> back to the branch. When releases drag on like M4 and 0.5 did it is
> quite annoying having trunk frozen.
>
> We could as easily use the same temporary branch name for all such
> release scenarios, or create new ones for each release and then delete
> it when we are done with the release, as the eventual release Tag would
> serve as marker enough after that point. Alternatively, create a 0.X.x
> branch as the first 0.X release is completed and then leave it in place
> for any future micro revisions.
>
> Robbie
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew Stitcher [mailto:astitcher@redhat.com]
> > Sent: 06 January 2010 22:15
> > To: dev@qpid.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: Tagging our releases
> >
> > On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 21:51 +0000, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> > > Shall we retroactively create a 0.5 tag for future usage? Andrews
> > suggestion of looking at the .svnrevision file doesn't work for 0.5
> as
> > it reports HEAD.
> >
> > Oh - I think retroactively creating the tag would be useful.
> >
> > Thinking a little about it -I think our 0.5 branch/tag naming is
> > broken:
> >
> > IMNSHO We should have a single 0.6 _branch_ and every release from it
> > should be tagged. Leading to something like:
> >
> > branches/0.6
> > tags/0.6-release
> > tags/0.6.1-release
> > etc.
> >
> > The only work that should happen on the 0.6 branch would be related
> to
> > a
> > later release of the 0.6 line so I can't see the point of a 0.6-
> release
> > branch (but I created it following the example from 0.5).
> >
> > So now I'm a bit stuck for tag names! I don't want to duplicate the
> > branch name as it will confuse things.
> >
> > Suggestions?
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I just noticed from the users list why Rajith wanted to know the
> > revision, and he understandably got the wrong revision from looking
> at
> > the 0.5-release branch. It doesn't change the outcome discussed as no
> > code was changed, but the noted rev 779632 was actually an error on
> my
> > part after 0.5 was produced (due to a partially-switched SVN
> checkout)
> > and 0.5 was released at rev 775777 as far as I can tell.
> > >
> > > Robbie
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Andrew Stitcher [mailto:astitcher@redhat.com]
> > > > Sent: 06 January 2010 21:26
> > > > To: dev@qpid.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Tagging our releases
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 15:29 -0500, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> > > > > I was just trying to quickly figure out the svn rev the Java
> 0.5
> > > > > release and found that there wasn't a tag available for it.
> > > > > (please note we do have a branch for it, but I still think we
> > should
> > > > > be tagging the final release).
> > > > > It seems we have tags for the previous releases (all though
> some
> > > > > aren't explicitly named).
> > > > >
> > > > > I thinks its good practise to tag releases. Some of the
> previous
> > > > > releases even had tags for RC's as well.
> > > > > So lets make sure we tag the final release for 0.6
> > > >
> > > > I fully intend to tag the 0.6 release when I make it.
> > > >
> > > > However note that you can find a releases svn revision by looking
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > *.svnrevision file in the distribution directory - obviously this
> > is
> > > > not
> > > > massively convenient.
> > > >
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > --
> > > > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> > > > Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> > > > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> > > Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> > > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> > Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
RE: Tagging our releases
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
As far as I understand, the rationale for creating the 0.X-release branch is just so that trunk can be unfrozen and any blockers committed back to the branch. When releases drag on like M4 and 0.5 did it is quite annoying having trunk frozen.
We could as easily use the same temporary branch name for all such release scenarios, or create new ones for each release and then delete it when we are done with the release, as the eventual release Tag would serve as marker enough after that point. Alternatively, create a 0.X.x branch as the first 0.X release is completed and then leave it in place for any future micro revisions.
Robbie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Stitcher [mailto:astitcher@redhat.com]
> Sent: 06 January 2010 22:15
> To: dev@qpid.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Tagging our releases
>
> On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 21:51 +0000, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> > Shall we retroactively create a 0.5 tag for future usage? Andrews
> suggestion of looking at the .svnrevision file doesn't work for 0.5 as
> it reports HEAD.
>
> Oh - I think retroactively creating the tag would be useful.
>
> Thinking a little about it -I think our 0.5 branch/tag naming is
> broken:
>
> IMNSHO We should have a single 0.6 _branch_ and every release from it
> should be tagged. Leading to something like:
>
> branches/0.6
> tags/0.6-release
> tags/0.6.1-release
> etc.
>
> The only work that should happen on the 0.6 branch would be related to
> a
> later release of the 0.6 line so I can't see the point of a 0.6-release
> branch (but I created it following the example from 0.5).
>
> So now I'm a bit stuck for tag names! I don't want to duplicate the
> branch name as it will confuse things.
>
> Suggestions?
>
> Andrew
>
>
> >
> > I just noticed from the users list why Rajith wanted to know the
> revision, and he understandably got the wrong revision from looking at
> the 0.5-release branch. It doesn't change the outcome discussed as no
> code was changed, but the noted rev 779632 was actually an error on my
> part after 0.5 was produced (due to a partially-switched SVN checkout)
> and 0.5 was released at rev 775777 as far as I can tell.
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Andrew Stitcher [mailto:astitcher@redhat.com]
> > > Sent: 06 January 2010 21:26
> > > To: dev@qpid.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Tagging our releases
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 15:29 -0500, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> > > > I was just trying to quickly figure out the svn rev the Java 0.5
> > > > release and found that there wasn't a tag available for it.
> > > > (please note we do have a branch for it, but I still think we
> should
> > > > be tagging the final release).
> > > > It seems we have tags for the previous releases (all though some
> > > > aren't explicitly named).
> > > >
> > > > I thinks its good practise to tag releases. Some of the previous
> > > > releases even had tags for RC's as well.
> > > > So lets make sure we tag the final release for 0.6
> > >
> > > I fully intend to tag the 0.6 release when I make it.
> > >
> > > However note that you can find a releases svn revision by looking
> in
> > > the
> > > *.svnrevision file in the distribution directory - obviously this
> is
> > > not
> > > massively convenient.
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> > > Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> > > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> > Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
> >
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
RE: Tagging our releases
Posted by Andrew Stitcher <as...@redhat.com>.
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 21:51 +0000, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> Shall we retroactively create a 0.5 tag for future usage? Andrews suggestion of looking at the .svnrevision file doesn't work for 0.5 as it reports HEAD.
Oh - I think retroactively creating the tag would be useful.
Thinking a little about it -I think our 0.5 branch/tag naming is broken:
IMNSHO We should have a single 0.6 _branch_ and every release from it
should be tagged. Leading to something like:
branches/0.6
tags/0.6-release
tags/0.6.1-release
etc.
The only work that should happen on the 0.6 branch would be related to a
later release of the 0.6 line so I can't see the point of a 0.6-release
branch (but I created it following the example from 0.5).
So now I'm a bit stuck for tag names! I don't want to duplicate the
branch name as it will confuse things.
Suggestions?
Andrew
>
> I just noticed from the users list why Rajith wanted to know the revision, and he understandably got the wrong revision from looking at the 0.5-release branch. It doesn't change the outcome discussed as no code was changed, but the noted rev 779632 was actually an error on my part after 0.5 was produced (due to a partially-switched SVN checkout) and 0.5 was released at rev 775777 as far as I can tell.
>
> Robbie
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew Stitcher [mailto:astitcher@redhat.com]
> > Sent: 06 January 2010 21:26
> > To: dev@qpid.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Tagging our releases
> >
> > On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 15:29 -0500, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> > > I was just trying to quickly figure out the svn rev the Java 0.5
> > > release and found that there wasn't a tag available for it.
> > > (please note we do have a branch for it, but I still think we should
> > > be tagging the final release).
> > > It seems we have tags for the previous releases (all though some
> > > aren't explicitly named).
> > >
> > > I thinks its good practise to tag releases. Some of the previous
> > > releases even had tags for RC's as well.
> > > So lets make sure we tag the final release for 0.6
> >
> > I fully intend to tag the 0.6 release when I make it.
> >
> > However note that you can find a releases svn revision by looking in
> > the
> > *.svnrevision file in the distribution directory - obviously this is
> > not
> > massively convenient.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> > Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
RE: Tagging our releases
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
Shall we retroactively create a 0.5 tag for future usage? Andrews suggestion of looking at the .svnrevision file doesn't work for 0.5 as it reports HEAD.
I just noticed from the users list why Rajith wanted to know the revision, and he understandably got the wrong revision from looking at the 0.5-release branch. It doesn't change the outcome discussed as no code was changed, but the noted rev 779632 was actually an error on my part after 0.5 was produced (due to a partially-switched SVN checkout) and 0.5 was released at rev 775777 as far as I can tell.
Robbie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Stitcher [mailto:astitcher@redhat.com]
> Sent: 06 January 2010 21:26
> To: dev@qpid.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Tagging our releases
>
> On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 15:29 -0500, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> > I was just trying to quickly figure out the svn rev the Java 0.5
> > release and found that there wasn't a tag available for it.
> > (please note we do have a branch for it, but I still think we should
> > be tagging the final release).
> > It seems we have tags for the previous releases (all though some
> > aren't explicitly named).
> >
> > I thinks its good practise to tag releases. Some of the previous
> > releases even had tags for RC's as well.
> > So lets make sure we tag the final release for 0.6
>
> I fully intend to tag the 0.6 release when I make it.
>
> However note that you can find a releases svn revision by looking in
> the
> *.svnrevision file in the distribution directory - obviously this is
> not
> massively convenient.
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: Tagging our releases
Posted by Andrew Stitcher <as...@redhat.com>.
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 15:29 -0500, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> I was just trying to quickly figure out the svn rev the Java 0.5
> release and found that there wasn't a tag available for it.
> (please note we do have a branch for it, but I still think we should
> be tagging the final release).
> It seems we have tags for the previous releases (all though some
> aren't explicitly named).
>
> I thinks its good practise to tag releases. Some of the previous
> releases even had tags for RC's as well.
> So lets make sure we tag the final release for 0.6
I fully intend to tag the 0.6 release when I make it.
However note that you can find a releases svn revision by looking in the
*.svnrevision file in the distribution directory - obviously this is not
massively convenient.
Andrew
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org