On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 03:01:30PM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote: > So if I understand correctly, when the vote fails it will auto revert so we > can work on the 4.1 branch again? For the moment it's kind of stuck in > limbo, but maybe that's how it's meant to be. I suppose we work on the > branch from the commit where the RC was cut, and then apply any patches > after the revert?
Frankly I made a mistake I think, but perhaps it's the right thing anyway. Until the VOTE is cancelled or passed, we're sort of stuck. This isn't a tool thing, as much as it's how I ended up doing things. Yes, you can work from the commit-sh that I published (keep in mind that it's set to 4.1.0 with no SNAPSHOT), or the one right before that (which has the SNAPSHOT). If we want, I can get it back to 4.1.0-SNAPSHOT easily... > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Chip Childers > <chip.child...@sungard.com>wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 02:50:52PM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote: > > > Why is the HEAD of 4.1 branch now on 4.1.1? Don't we need a stable 4.1.0 > > > completed first, before we break 4.1? I ran into several issues today > > with > > > this, and then finally now there's not a database upgrade from 4.1.0 to > > > 4.1.1-SNAPSHOT. > > > > I advanced it, but will revert and then re-advance it when the VOTE > > closes. I figured that a history of 4.1.0-SNAPSHOT > 4.1.0 > > > 4.1.1-SNAPSHOT was the most logical thing to do. > > > > That being said, yes, we need to get the DB upgrade in place I guess. > > Should I revert the 4.1.1-SNAPSHOT to 4.1.0-SNAPSHOT? > >
