New rebase release

New rebase release

[Charles Wilson]

Jason,

After the flurry of work and new features added to rebase in late
July/early August, any chance you could bump the version and roll a new
release?

--
Chuck

Re: New rebase release

[Charles Wilson]

On 9/19/2011 3:46 PM, Reini Urban wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Charles Wilson
> <xxx@yyy.zzz wrote:
PCYMTNQREAIYR

That is all.
--
Chuck

Re: New rebase release

[Jason Tishler]

On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 02:53:54PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> After the flurry of work and new features added to rebase in late
> July/early August, any chance you could bump the version and roll a
> new release?

Yes.  Should the next version be 4.0 or 3.1?  I recommend the former,
since there has been many significant changes.

Thanks,
Jason

-- 
PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/pubkey.asc or key servers
Fingerprint: 7A73 1405 7F2B E669 C19D  8784 1AFD E4CC ECF4 8EF6

Re: New rebase release

[Charles Wilson]

On 9/20/2011 11:24 AM, Jason Tishler wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 02:53:54PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> After the flurry of work and new features added to rebase in late
>> July/early August, any chance you could bump the version and roll a
>> new release?
> 
> Yes.  Should the next version be 4.0 or 3.1?  I recommend the former,
> since there has been many significant changes.

I agree: 4.0.

We could call it "rebase NT" for "New Technology" -- that is much better
than 3.1, which is merely a pretty wrapper around the same old
underlying cruft. :-)

Did anybody see the suggested new logo for the linux 3.1 kernel:
http://thehackernews.com/2011/09/suggested-linux-31-kernel-logo.html

--
Chuck

Re: New rebase release

[Jason Tishler]

Chuck,
Corinna,

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:37:09AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> On 9/20/2011 11:24 AM, Jason Tishler wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 02:53:54PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> >> After the flurry of work and new features added to rebase in late
> >> July/early August, any chance you could bump the version and roll a
> >> new release?
> > 
> > Yes.  Should the next version be 4.0 or 3.1?  I recommend the
> > former, since there has been many significant changes.
> 
> I agree: 4.0.

I'm about to commit the following patch:

    http://www.tishler.net/jason/software/rebase/rebase.patch

Any comments before I do so?

Additionally, are there any conventions I should following when I tag
the release?

Thanks,
Jason

Re: New rebase release

[Charles Wilson]

On 9/23/2011 11:11 AM, Jason Tishler wrote:
> I'm about to commit the following patch:
> 
>     http://www.tishler.net/jason/software/rebase/rebase.patch
> 
> Any comments before I do so?

Looks fine to me.

> Additionally, are there any conventions I should following when I tag
> the release?

"." is not allowed in cvs tags, and they are not allowed to start with a
number.  So, I usually do this:

x.y.z -> vx_y_z
4.0.0 -> v4_0_0

There are other conventions -- and things get more complicated when you
want to have branches -- but that will do for now.

--
Chuck

Re: New rebase release

[Jason Tishler]

On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 06:21:30PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> On 9/23/2011 11:11 AM, Jason Tishler wrote:
> > Additionally, are there any conventions I should following when I tag
> > the release?
> 
> "." is not allowed in cvs tags, and they are not allowed to start with a
> number.  So, I usually do this:
> 
> x.y.z -> vx_y_z
> 4.0.0 -> v4_0_0

Since tags are global to the entire CVS repository, should I prepend
the tag with "rebase" to guarantee uniqueness?

Thanks,
Jason

Re: New rebase release

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 11:31:56AM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
>On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 06:21:30PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> On 9/23/2011 11:11 AM, Jason Tishler wrote:
>> > Additionally, are there any conventions I should following when I tag
>> > the release?
>> 
>> "." is not allowed in cvs tags, and they are not allowed to start with a
>> number.  So, I usually do this:
>> 
>> x.y.z -> vx_y_z
>> 4.0.0 -> v4_0_0
>
>Since tags are global to the entire CVS repository, should I prepend
>the tag with "rebase" to guarantee uniqueness?

Yes, please.

cgf

Re: New rebase release

[Jason Tishler]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 11:43:04AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 11:31:56AM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
> >Since tags are global to the entire CVS repository, should I prepend
> >the tag with "rebase" to guarantee uniqueness?
> 
> Yes, please.

Will do.

Thanks,
Jason