Work at SourceForge, help us to make it a better place! We have an immediate need for a Support Technician in our San Francisco or Denver office.

Close

Diff of /doc/GIT-WORKFLOW.md [000000] .. [bf5163] Maximize Restore

  Switch to side-by-side view

--- a
+++ b/doc/GIT-WORKFLOW.md
@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+# Git workflow for SBCL
+
+## Version numbering
+
+Historically each SBCL commit incremented the number in
+version.lisp-expr, and prepended that version number to the first line
+of the commit message. For CVS this served us well, but since Git
+makes it easier for anyone to create branches that run in parallel to
+the current "master" timeline, it destroys the illusion of a single
+official timeline defined through version.lisp-expr.
+
+In Git workflow, version.lisp-expr no longer exists in the repository,
+nor is the version number prepended to commit messages.
+
+Instead, we construct a version number as follows when building SBCL
+or generating a source tarball:
+
+For branch master:
+
+  release.commits-on-master-since-release.sha1
+
+  Eg. 1.0.48.20-152c97d
+
+                          Last release: 1.0.48
+       Commits on master after release: 20
+          SHA1 abbrev for current HEAD: 152c97d
+
+  If there are no commits on master since the last release, both the
+  count and the SHA1 are dropped.
+
+For other branches:
+
+  release.commits-on-branch-and-master-since-release.branch.commits-on-branch.sha1
+
+  Eg. 1.0.44.26.wip-pretty-backtraces.4-674f875
+
+                          Last release: 1.0.44
+       Commits on master after release: 26
+                                Branch: wip-pretty-backtraces
+   Commits on branch but not on master: 4
+          SHA1 abbrev for current HEAD: 674f875
+
+In both cases -dirty is appended to the version number if the tree
+isn't clean when building.
+
+Anyone who publishes binaries built using an altered version, should
+do so on a branch named appropriately, so that the binaries identify
+themselves as 1.0.50.debian.2 or whatever. If they wish to use a
+source release instead working from Git, they should identify their
+changes with an appropriate edit to version.lisp-expr.
+
+To cater for those whose existing processes really don't like the
+SHA1s part in version numbers, setting NO_GIT_HASH_IN_VERSION=t in the
+environment for make.sh will make the version number generator leave
+out the hash.
+
+## Making a release (release.sh)
+
+Short story: use `release.sh`.
+
+`release.sh` makes a release *locally.* This means it will perform all
+actions required for the release in the local git checkout, and will
+then instruct you how to proceed in order to push the release to the
+outside world.
+
+###Synopsis:
+
+    ./release.sh VERSION [-s]
+
+**VERSION** is the version to make a release for. Example: `1.0.46`.
+
+**-s** instructs `git tag` to create a gpg-signed tag for this
+release. Highly recommended.
+
+###Description:
+
+`release.sh` will perform these actions:
+
+* Check that the local checkout is clean.
+* Update NEWS and make a commit stating the release version number
+* Make an sbcl.<VERSION> tag and optionally sign it.
+* Build SBCL
+* Run tests
+* Build SBCL with the SBCL that just had tests pass
+* Build docs
+* Create source, binary, documentation tarballs
+* Sign these tarballs
+* Give you further instructions.
+
+After release.sh is done, you can inspect the results, and commence
+struggling with the SF.net file release system from hell. You are very
+brave.