Re: [VOTE] Unify release SVN tag, SVN branch and dating policy for 1.x and trunk
Issac Goldstand <[email protected]> Thu, 08 Jan 2009 08:09:25 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.apache.apreq |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Joe Schaefer wrote: > ----- Original Message ---- > > >> From: Issac Goldstand <[email protected]> >> To: APREQ List <[email protected]> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 4:16:06 AM >> Subject: [VOTE] Unify release SVN tag, SVN branch and dating policy for 1.x and trunk >> >> After reviewing the RELEASE files for 1.x and 2.x, I'd like to propose >> that we clean them up a bit (though I don't forsee any more 1.3 >> releases, we may as well get it in at the same time as 2.x) >> >> I won't summarize the current orders of operation (see [1] and [2]), but >> here's what I'd like to see happen: >> >> 1) Create a release branch 1.x/2.x in /branches/ >> 2) In trunk, modify the CHANGES and STATUS files to reflect a new dev cycle >> 3) From the branch, prep the release for CPAN (don't forget to #undef >> the APREQ_VERSION_IS_DEV macro definition). Test. Upload. Vote. >> Repeat if needed. >> 4) AFTER the release is approved by the PMC, modify the RELEASE and >> STATUS files on branch + commit. Modify in trunk + commit. >> > > The way it should work IMO is to do whatever needs doing on the branch, > including filling in the dates (a few days in advance) on the RELEASE > and STATUS files, and then generate the tarball + sig and put that > pair up for vote. If the vote doesn't pass by the dates you used, > the vote fails and that version is an unreleased dud. > That sounds right and more in line with the normal httpd release procedure - that would mean doing (4) before (1) and leaving the rest as-is.