Re: svn branches cleanup

[Owen O'Malley <om...@apache.org>]

On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Arun C Murthy <ac...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
> >
> > We should rename the 2.x branches as:
> > branch-2.0.1-alpha -> branch-2.0
> > branch-2.1.0-alpha -> branch-2.1
>
> I'm ok with the rest, but please don't rename the 'alpha' branches. We'll need those for later after hadoop-2 is stable.


The pattern that we follow is that branches look like:

-------------------------------------------> trunk
    \
     \------> branch-2.0
      \
       \-----> branch-2.1
        \
         v
          branch-2

With tags having the triples (2.0.0, 2.0.1). I was assuming that
branch-2.0.1 was supposed to be branch-2.0. branch-2.0.1 only makes
sense if your releases/tags are going to be 2.0.1.0.

-- Owen

Re: svn branches cleanup

[Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <vi...@hortonworks.com>]

Seems like we are done with cleanup of 0.23.* and a separate email thread in progress on common-dev@h.a.o w.r.t 2.* branches.

Thanks for doing the needful, Owen!

+Vinod

On Aug 31, 2012, at 3:04 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Arun C Murthy <ac...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
>>> 
>>> We should rename the 2.x branches as:
>>> branch-2.0.1-alpha -> branch-2.0
>>> branch-2.1.0-alpha -> branch-2.1
>> 
>> I'm ok with the rest, but please don't rename the 'alpha' branches. We'll need those for later after hadoop-2 is stable.
> 
> 
> The pattern that we follow is that branches look like:
> 
> -------------------------------------------> trunk
>    \
>     \------> branch-2.0
>      \
>       \-----> branch-2.1
>        \
>         v
>          branch-2
> 
> With tags having the triples (2.0.0, 2.0.1). I was assuming that
> branch-2.0.1 was supposed to be branch-2.0. branch-2.0.1 only makes
> sense if your releases/tags are going to be 2.0.1.0.
> 
> -- Owen