Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Plain View
HBase >> mail # dev >> Marking fix version


+
Jonathan Hsieh 2013-04-04, 15:40
+
lars hofhansl 2013-04-04, 17:10
+
Jonathan Hsieh 2013-04-04, 17:15
Copy link to this message
-
Re: Marking fix version
Ok.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The argument for excluding the 0.96 tag makes sense.  Can we agree to do
> this:
>
> Commit only to trunk: Mark with 0.98
> Commit to 0.95 and trunk : Mark with 0.98, and 0.95.x
> Commit to 0.94.x and 0.95, and trunk: Mark with 0.98, 0.95.x, and 0.94.x
> Commit to 89-fb: Mark with 89-fb.
> Commit site fixes: no version
>
> Should we remove 0.96 tag for now until the branch appears again?
>
> Thanks,
> Jon.
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:10 AM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Thank Jon,
> >
> > I do not think we have to include anticipated future branches in the
> tags.
> > The release notes are not accumulative but list changes made for each
> > release.
> >
> > So if something is in 0.95.x a 0.96 tag neither needed nor wanted (IMHO)
> > until we actually have a *parallel* 0.96 branch.
> >
> > That is why all 0.95+trunk changes *have* to be tagged with 0.98 as well,
> > because at this point the two branches are in parallel. Actually we
> should
> > go through and make that so in jira.
> >
> > That means the 0.96 tag is not needed right now (and in fact will make
> > just confusing, because at the time we do release 0.96 we'll see the same
> > issue in the release notes twice)
> >
> > -- Lars
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >  From: Jonathan Hsieh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 8:40 AM
> > Subject: Marking fix version
> >
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I just wanted to make sure we are on the same page here when we
> committing
> > code and that we are consistent when marking fix version in the jira.
>  Its
> > pretty important that we get this right because our release notes are
> > generated from these as of 0.94.
> >
> > Here's what I'm doing and suggesting
> >
> > Commit only to trunk: Mark with 0.98
> > Commit to 0.95 and trunk : Mark with 0.98, 0.96, and 0.95.x
> > Commit to 0.94.x and 0.95, and trunk: Mark with 0.98, 0.96, 0.95.x, and
> > 0.94.x
> > Commit to 89-fb: Mark with 89-fb.
> > Commit site fixes: no version
> >
> > My understanding is that 0.96 will be a branch off of 0.95 -- so any fix
> to
> > 0.95 is a fix to 0.96 until 0.96 branches.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jon.
> >
> > --
> > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > // [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
>
> --
> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> // [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

--
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
+
lars hofhansl 2013-04-04, 17:33
+
Nick Dimiduk 2013-04-04, 18:55
+
lars hofhansl 2013-04-04, 19:04
+
Stack 2013-04-04, 18:43
+
Stack 2013-04-06, 06:18
+
Jonathan Hsieh 2013-04-06, 20:05
+
Stack 2013-09-18, 22:00