From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Alpha releases: How to tag |
Date: | 2009-08-03 14:59:16 |
Message-ID: | 4A76FB44.7030206@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>> Does it need a version number change? Maybe just a tag (no branch) is
>> all that is required.
>>
>
> I think that we do want the alpha releases to identify themselves as
> such. And we want a marker in CVS as to what state the alpha release
> corresponds to. Peter's label-and-undo approach seems like a kluge;
> and it doesn't scale to consider the possibility that we might
> want to re-release an alpha after fixing some particularly evil bug.
> A tag without a branch won't handle that either.
>
> I feel that making a branch is the way to go. If we try to get away
> with a shortcut, we'll probably regret it.
>
>
>
Yes, if that's what we want then definitely branch. I guess the branch
will (almost) only ever have exactly one commit on it.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2009-08-03 15:03:47 | Re: Review: Revise parallel pg_restore's scheduling heuristic |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-08-03 14:52:38 | Re: CVS Head parser error? |