> From: Roy T. Fielding [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 01 May 2002 00:09
> >> Well then why are the patches in the tree??? I'm not sure I like the > >> idea of > >> tagging and then tagging just some files. Seems like if we haven't got a > >> stable HEAD we shouldn't be tagging. We got into this whole business of > >> tagging often as a way of avoiding having this sort of thing. Ifw e > >> tagged > >> and it wasn't stable, who cares. Just retag when it is and move on... > >> > >> This seems to be a growing trend and one I think we should stop. > > > > I disagree. I see a lot of value in managing a release by tagging then > > selectively > > picking up showstopper fixes. And the RM should make the decision if this > > is the way he > > wants to get the release out. > > I strongly dislike the action of tagging the tree with a version number > and then moving that tag. If we aren't sure about the version, then the > RM should use a personal tag and only replace it with the real version tag Should we invent an RM prerelease tag which will be removed after the final tag with the version number? > when we are sure. If people aren't willing to run up the version numbers, > then they shouldn't tag them as such until the version is ready for > tarball. > > Justin already showed that an RM can do it this way effectively. Point taken. I'll remember that for my next RM adventure. For this release I'd like to continue like I started (one last bump), so we can get 2.0.36 out the door. And yes, I liked justins method aswell. /me slaps himself for not tagging with STRIKER first... > .....Roy Sander
