Jonathan Hsieh 2013-04-04, 15:40
lars hofhansl 2013-04-04, 17:10
Jonathan Hsieh 2013-04-04, 17:15
Andrew Purtell 2013-04-04, 17:18
Yes, I think we should remove the 0.96 tag. Stack said the other day that he should have just renamed 0.96 to 0.95 rather than moving all the issues.
The rest is already what I have been doing for issues I am committing (so +1 :) ), but I did notice that not all issues are tagged correctly.
From: Jonathan Hsieh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: Marking fix version
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?
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:10 AM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>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)
> From: Jonathan Hsieh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 8:40 AM
>Subject: Marking fix version
>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
>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.
>// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
>// Software Engineer, Cloudera
>// [EMAIL PROTECTED]
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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