Tagging current trunk before big merge

[Justin Obara]

Antranig, what do you think about just creating something like a “1.x.last” branch and not tag at all? I’m not yet sold on this idea myself, but thought I’d bring it up as another possibility.


On June 17, 2015 at 11:11:43 AM, Antranig Basman (antranig.basman at colorado.edu) wrote:

Shortly a large pull request will be merged to Infusion trunk which  
clears out a large number of obsolete framework features. This marks a  
"point of no return" with respect to maintaining compatibility with code  
written against the Infusion 1.x framework - although our components  
written against the new framework will maintain their API contracts  
unchanged.  

The pull request is at  
https://github.com/fluid-project/infusion/pull/591 and a list of the  
framework changes is basically equivalent to the one at  
http://docs.fluidproject.org/infusion/development/DeprecationsIn1_5.html  
. After this merge, the framework's API will be very much closer to the  
one we will deliver for the Infusion 2.0 release than the still  
basically 1.x-compatible version currently in trunk.  

In fluid-work yesterday we were having a conversation about what we  
should name the tag we make to represent the current state of trunk.  

https://botbot.me/freenode/fluid-work/2015-06-16/?msg=41990122&page=1  

We talked over various possibilities involving 1.6 or 1.9 version  
numbers, but we considered that given we had not done any of the testing  
required for a full release and would probably never produce a full  
release based on this revision, that the use of such a specific version  
number would be misleading.  

The current proposal is to tag current trunk with a meaningful string  
that clearly doesn't correspond to a release number, for example,  
"1.x-last" and then after the merge to move trunk to a semver-compatible  
release number of "2.0.0-alpha.1". This would become the real release  
number of the first release we made from trunk subsequently, which would  
then be bumped up to "2.0.0-alpha.2" etc.  

If anyone would like to make a further proposal, please could you read  
up in the IRC transcript above and then followup to this thread - cheers  

Antranig  
_______________________________________________________  
fluid-work mailing list - fluid-work at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca  
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,  
see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/pipermail/fluid-work/attachments/20150617/adc74bb0/attachment.htm>