* release-related minor questions (post switch to git)
@ 2013-11-22 14:06 Joel Brobecker
2013-11-22 17:40 ` Tom Tromey
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2013-11-22 14:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Hello,
I just wanted to have your thoughts on the following little details
involving the creation of GDDB releases.
1. The branch name: Should we continue with the same naming scheme?
At the moment, we have:
gdb_7_5-branch
gdb_7_6-branch
etc.
I think this odd naming scheme comes from a CVS limitation,
and that we could switch to something such as:
gdb-7.7-branch
On the other hand, the name is not *that* bad, and changing it
may break some pre-existing scripts. Since they would need to be
changed anyhow...
2. Do we need a tag for the branch-point commit, or is it sufficient
to just document it.
I am wondering if anyone has ever used that tag, and whether
they would use it with the git repo...
3. For the release tag, the tag name syntax is like so:
gdb_7_5_1-2012-11-29-release
Do we want to continue using the same format? In particular,
3.a: Do we still need the date in the release tag
(that information is part of the tag)
3.b Same as 1; use a more natural syntax re version number?
Thanks!
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: release-related minor questions (post switch to git)
2013-11-22 14:06 release-related minor questions (post switch to git) Joel Brobecker
@ 2013-11-22 17:40 ` Tom Tromey
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Tom Tromey @ 2013-11-22 17:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches
>>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> writes:
Joel> 1. The branch name: Should we continue with the same naming scheme?
Joel> At the moment, we have:
Joel> gdb_7_5-branch
Joel> gdb_7_6-branch
Joel> etc.
Joel> I think this odd naming scheme comes from a CVS limitation,
Joel> and that we could switch to something such as:
Joel> gdb-7.7-branch
Joel> On the other hand, the name is not *that* bad, and changing it
Joel> may break some pre-existing scripts. Since they would need to be
Joel> changed anyhow...
Using the more obvious name seems nicer to me, but I don't think it is
super important. Either one seems good enough.
I think we shouldn't worry about pre-existing scripts.
Joel> 2. Do we need a tag for the branch-point commit, or is it sufficient
Joel> to just document it.
Joel> I am wondering if anyone has ever used that tag, and whether
Joel> they would use it with the git repo...
In CVS you needed that tag to work sanely with branches.
git records the branchpoint for us, see "git help merge-base".
Joel> 3. For the release tag, the tag name syntax is like so:
Joel> gdb_7_5_1-2012-11-29-release
Joel> Do we want to continue using the same format? In particular,
Joel> 3.a: Do we still need the date in the release tag
Joel> (that information is part of the tag)
I don't think it provides any useful information.
Joel> 3.b Same as 1; use a more natural syntax re version number?
It seems sensible to make parallel decisions for (1) and (3b).
Tom
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-11-22 17:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-11-22 14:06 release-related minor questions (post switch to git) Joel Brobecker
2013-11-22 17:40 ` Tom Tromey
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).