Daniel John Debrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They all seem like bug fixes that would need to be merged to the new branch
so unless I hear otherwise, I plan to cut the branch(es) from revision
635183.
Can you confirm that 635183 was the revision base for the
Daniel John Debrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They all seem like bug fixes that would need to be merged to the new branch
so unless I hear otherwise, I plan to cut the branch(es) from revision
635183.
Can you confirm that 635183 was the revision base for the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Daniel John Debrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They all seem like bug fixes that would need to be merged to the new branch
so unless I hear otherwise, I plan to cut the branch(es) from revision
635183.
Can you confirm that 635183 was
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They all seem like bug fixes that would need to be merged to the new branch
so unless I hear otherwise, I plan to cut the branch(es) from revision
635183.
Can you confirm that 635183 was the revision base for the branch?
Thanks,
Dan.
Daniel John Debrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Rick Hillegas wrote:
When I run sysinfo against the branch, it reports that the version
id is 10.4.0.1 alpha - (635685). It think that you need to modify
the 3rd digit in the release id. I believe that is the secret
handshake which turns an
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Daniel John Debrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Rick Hillegas wrote:
When I run sysinfo against the branch, it reports that the version
id is 10.4.0.1 alpha - (635685). It think that you need to modify
the 3rd digit in the release id. I believe that is the secret
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I did some experimenting, and here are the results:
Alt A:
With maint=001 and beta=true
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861)
Alt B:
With maint=001 and beta=false
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861M)
Alt C:
With maint=101 and beta=true
10.4.1.1 beta - (635861M)
Alt
Knut Anders Hatlen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I did some experimenting, and here are the results:
Alt A:
With maint=001 and beta=true
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861)
Alt B:
With maint=001 and beta=false
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861M)
Alt C:
With maint=101
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Knut Anders Hatlen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I did some experimenting, and here are the results:
Alt A:
With maint=001 and beta=true
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861)
Alt B:
With maint=001 and beta=false
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861M)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Knut Anders Hatlen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I did some experimenting, and here are the results:
Alt A:
With maint=001 and beta=true
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861)
Alt B:
With maint=001 and beta=false
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861M)
Rick Hillegas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Knut Anders Hatlen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I did some experimenting, and here are the results:
Alt A: With maint=001 and beta=true
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861)
Alt B:
With
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Daniel John Debrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Rick Hillegas wrote:
When I run sysinfo against the branch, it reports that the version
id is 10.4.0.1 alpha - (635685). It think that you need to modify
the 3rd digit in the release id. I believe that is the secret
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rick Hillegas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Knut Anders Hatlen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I did some experimenting, and here are the results:
Alt A: With maint=001 and beta=true
Knut Anders Hatlen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Knut Anders Hatlen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I did some experimenting, and here are the results:
Alt A:
With maint=001 and beta=true
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635861)
Alt B:
With
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would like to change the Wiki so that each step of the release process
becomes a cookbook, that the RM can follow.
or that could be implemented in an ant script ...
Dan.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
2. Before creating the first release candidate, update both the third
and the fourth digit of the version number by updating the maint
property in tools/ant/properties/release.properties, and set the
beta property in the same file to false. After
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
2. Before creating the first release candidate, update both the third
and the fourth digit of the version number by updating the maint
property in tools/ant/properties/release.properties, and set the
beta property in the same file to false. After
Daniel John Debrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would like to change the Wiki so that each step of the release process
becomes a cookbook, that the RM can follow.
or that could be implemented in an ant script ...
A laudable goal to be sure... but I think I'll
When I run sysinfo against the trunk i get, Why ?
10.5.0.0 alpha - (635600)
Daniel John Debrunner-2 wrote:
Rick Hillegas wrote:
When I run sysinfo against the branch, it reports that the version id is
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635685). It think that you need to modify the 3rd
digit in the
fp wrote:
When I run sysinfo against the trunk i get, Why ?
10.5.0.0 alpha - (635600)
10.5 because with the creation of the 10.4 branch, trunk becomes the
development line for the next release (10.5).
alpha because the third digit is zero and the trunk is leading edge
development, see:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They all seem like bug fixes that would need to be merged to the new branch
so unless I hear otherwise, I plan to cut the branch(es) from revision
635183.
I plan to do this early on Monday (CET).
Done:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They all seem like bug fixes that would need to be merged to the new branch
so unless I hear otherwise, I plan to cut the branch(es) from revision
635183.
I plan to do this early on Monday (CET).
The wiki page for how to bump the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The update of the maint property on the 10.4 branch will hopefully
happen soon...
There...
r635654 | dyre | 2008-03-10 20:03:13 +0100 (Mon, 10 Mar 2008) | 2 lines
Updating the maint property
On 3/10/08, Dyre Tjeldvoll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The update of the maint property on the 10.4 branch will hopefully
happen soon...
There...
r635654 | dyre | 2008-03-10 20:03:13 +0100
Dyre Tjeldvoll wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The update of the maint property on the 10.4 branch will hopefully
happen soon...
There...
r635654 | dyre | 2008-03-10 20:03:13 +0100 (Mon, 10 Mar 2008) | 2 lines
Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
On 3/10/08, Dyre Tjeldvoll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The update of the maint property on the 10.4 branch will hopefully
happen soon...
There...
r635654 | dyre |
Rick Hillegas wrote:
Dyre Tjeldvoll wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The update of the maint property on the 10.4 branch will hopefully
happen soon...
There...
r635654 | dyre | 2008-03-10 20:03:13 +0100 (Mon, 10 Mar
Dyre Tjeldvoll wrote:
Rick Hillegas wrote:
Dyre Tjeldvoll wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The update of the maint property on the 10.4 branch will hopefully
happen soon...
There...
r635654 | dyre | 2008-03-10
Rick Hillegas wrote:
When I run sysinfo against the branch, it reports that the version id is
10.4.0.1 alpha - (635685). It think that you need to modify the 3rd
digit in the release id. I believe that is the secret handshake which
turns an alpha into a beta.
The secret handshake is
29 matches
Mail list logo