On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Stephen Haberman <step...@exigencecorp.com>wrote:
> So, I was messing with getting Ant to handle this conditional, when I > realized if we tag the very first svn commit from 2006 with a dummy > "0.0.0" tag: > > git tag 0.0.0 ab0aa686820319e1 > > Then on the master branch, "git describe --tags" shows: > > 0.0.0-7062-g8a0cf14 > I was thinking about something like that too. I actually kinda like it, and it gives an easy monotonic counter for tracking master. (Note I've been using lightweight tags for messing around, but we could > use annotated tags...wasn't sure what we'd been using so far.) > I don't think we're using proper git tags yet. The 'tags' currently in the tree for 2.5.1, etc that were imported from SVN are actually just regular git commits. For 2.6, I'm planning on experimenting with git tags to mark points along the 2.6 release branch. That would make "git describe" appealing because then the releases would be simply "2.6rc1", "2.6", etc (which would be actual tags too), while intermediary development steps would still be "2.6rc1-42-blah". Hm, something to consider though, I was planning on creating the 2.6 branch and then immediately tagging as 2.6rc1. Since tags are independent of branches, I think that would actually cause the 2.6rc1 tag to be picked up by master too. Not sure how to best cope with that. -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Contributors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
