|
From: Anton A. <ai...@ca...> - 2003-02-20 11:34:28
|
On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote: > > Ok, bad wording. We need a new product *version*. So just changing > > 1.7.1 in the top configure.in. The current development > > 1.7.1-200302191139 tar.bz snaposhots or 1.7.1 development BK pulls are > > 1) confusing > > 2) ends up reporting issues in stable version 1.7.1 however that's not > > the case due to lack of proper versioning. > > Anton, I'm sorry I couldn't convince you. I try to explain more > affable why it's bad when both the release and the new development > version is called 1.7.1. Sorry, I didn't have time to think/read or write emails yesterday... It's not that I was ignoring you... The version in bitkeeper is now changed to 1.7.2-WIP. I will whenever I make a release, use the following procedure (example for 1.7.2 and 1.7.3 releases): * We are now on 1.7.2-WIP and want to make a 1.7.2 release. - version change to 1.7.2 in configure.in and ChangeLog - ./autogen.sh - bk citool - bk tag with 1.7.2 - bk push - make dist and rpmbuild - post release on SF.net * We now have a 1.7.2 release and want to start work on the next release: - version change to 1.7.3-WIP in configure.in and ChangeLog - ./autogen.sh - bk citool - bk push - make a new snapshot on the SF website * We are now working on 1.7.3-WIP which will later become 1.7.3 and be released and so on for each release... Happy now? Anton ps. Szaka you will get this twice as I forgot the CCs the first time round. -- Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cantab.net> (replace at with @) Linux NTFS maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.freenode.net WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/ |
