|
yes, agreed. We can simply keep the 1.5 final
tagged and if at any moment we need to fix something for 1.5 we can branch off
then and do it. We could theoreticall do it from 1.3 even.
sanjaya.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 3:28
PM
Subject: Re: Release
Hmm, Not sure what the outcome
is here. Here's my perspective....
Cutting an Alpha branch is a waste of time isn't it ? Let's face facts
we are not adding function into 1.6 (HEAD) prior to cutting 1.5 final (due
mainly to or quick release mentality - which I like). So, therefore, we are
only branching at 1.5 alpha as a way of "time stamping" that "this was the
release code" (and this can and should be done in other ways
right?).
If anyone does want to
start coding 1.6 then it is they who should branch and then merge into HEAD
when we have released 1.5.
Branching at 1.5 release is absolutely fine and correct. We can then
parallel fix, if necessary.
John Hawkins
| "Damitha Kumarage"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27/01/2005 06:07
|
Please respond
to
"Apache AXIS C Developers
List" |
|
|
To
| Samisa Abeysinghe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Apache AXIS C Developers List
<[email protected]>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
| Re:
Release |
|
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 10:01:07 +0600, Samisa Abeysinghe wrote
>
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:44:13 +0600, Damitha Kumarage
>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu,
2005-01-27 at 00:23, John Hawkins wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> >
>
> > > C support is done.
> > >
> > >
re the release in general. We would much prefer it if an Alpha branch
could
> > be cut but HEAD is where all fixes go into?
> >
> > We need to branch now for alpha and beta and final release will
be done on
that
> > branch. All the fixes for 1.5 branch will be
continued on that branch.
> > That means that we have to separately
maintain that branch for that perticular
> > release. We did not do
this
> > up until now. As we discussed
> > We should start
keeping the releases(APIs) stable at least from 1. 5 release.
> >
That means when a user point a bug in a perticular release we should
not
say to
> > him, use the latest one. Instead we should fix it
on the perticular release
> > branch and if needed do a minor release
on that branch(kind of a patch
> > release). Shall we start this from
1.5? any ideas?
>
> This certainly sounds very good. However,
would it not add burden as
> far as maintanance is
concerned.
> Given that we now have nightly builds in place, would it be
that
> unfair to ask for trying the latest?
Is it possible to run
the whole ant test suite on a branch?
damitha
>
>
Thanks,
> Samisa...
> >
> > ~
> >
>
> Is that possible?
> > see above
> > Our local build
takes the src from HEAD and it would be very bad news if we
> > had
to change it :-(
> >
> > I hope above will solve your
problem
> >
> > damitha
> >
> >
>
> > > Is that OK?
> > >
> > >
John.
> > >
> > >
> > > John
Hawkins
> > >
> > Damitha Kumarage
> > hSenid
Software International (PVT) Ltd(Web: www.hsenid.com)
> >
[EMAIL PROTECTED]([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> >
> > Lanka
Software Foundation (http://www.opensource.lk)
> >
>
>
--
Damitha Kumarage
hSenid Software International (PVT)
Ltd(Web:
www.hsenid.com)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Lanka
Software Foundation
(http://www.opensource.lk)
|
