Hi Mitch, I'm heading for a plane and will be away for a while. This may be useful - how we're doing snapshots (for this repo anyhow)
http://codegeo.org/confluence/display/codegeo/Publishing http://codegeo.org/repos/codegeo/build/trunk/build-base.xml Cheers, Geoff On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 3:14 AM, Mitch Gitman <[email protected]> wrote: > Bumping this to the top to see if I can get any takers. I'm particularly > interested in seeing how anyone was able to work a timestamp or buildnumber > into the mix and whether that needed a custom revision strategy. > > On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Mitch Gitman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I'm grappling with some of the choices surrounding integration versions. > > > > One assumption I want to make is that non-integration versions—versions > > that represent releases—do not have any special suffixes. So I would > release > > version 2.0 of something rather than 2.0-FINAL or 2.0-RELEASE or > something > > like that. > > > > I do want to use a special suffix to represent integration versions. One > > combination that makes sense to me is -DEV and -CI. It seems that I > should > > specify something like the following in my Ivy settings: > > <latest-revision name="mylatest-revision" > > usedefaultspecialmeanings="false"> > > <specialMeaning name="CI" value="-2"/> > > <specialMeaning name="DEV" value="-1"/> > > </latest-revision> > > > > Does this look right? Notice no hyphen prefix. And as long I'm mentioning > > the suffixes -DEV and -CI, anyone care to suggest a better suffix or > > combination? Of course there's always -SNAPSHOT. > > > > Now suppose I want to do prolific versioning where each integration > version > > gets its own timestamp. It seems like overkill to do prolific versioning > on > > publishes on a developer machine. Only for the CI server do I only want > to > > produce a unique, timestamped version on each publish. So I want to have > the > > ordering from newest to oldest go something like: > > 1. 2.1-DEV on developer machine > > 2. 2.1-CI-201008221522 on CI-published repository > > 3. 2.1-CI-201008220801 on CI-published repository > > 4. 2.1-CI-201008201948 on CI-published repository > > 5. 2.0 on release repository > > > > Do these look like reasonable conventions, or could someone recommend a > > better convention for producing a unique version from each successful CI > > build? > > > > If these conventions do look reasonable, how do I incorporate the extra > > timestamp suffix into my latest-revision latest-strategy in Ivy settings > to > > ensure that CI versions get ordered by timestamp but still get treated as > > older than DEV and release builds? > > > > P.S. I need to go back over some old ivy-user threads on this topic. > > >
