diff mbox

Proposal to add additional annotated tags

Message ID f9f861cb-e2ba-d219-d627-2f9c9bcd7b03@redhat.com
State Committed
Headers

Commit Message

Florian Weimer Oct. 16, 2017, 7:41 p.m. UTC 
  On 10/16/2017 09:15 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:

>> Should I use .90 in the tags and not .9000?  I'm asking because
>>
>> -#define RELEASE "stable"
>> -#define VERSION "2.26"
>> +#define RELEASE "development"
>> +#define VERSION "2.26.90"
>>
>> we use .90 versions during development.  (I mistakenly assumed that
>> this was something Fedora-specific.)  I switched to .9000 to avoid
>> collisions with point-release tarballs from a long-lived release
>> branch branch.
> 
> Why don't we change VERSION to 2.26.9000 to make the tags match?
> 
> The choice of .90 was always arbitrary.
> 
> I see nothing but benefit in using a larger development revision
> number.

Testing showed no problems caused by .9000.  I'm going to install the 
attached patch.

I will use .90 tags for the older development branches, and the .9000 
tag for the new branch only.

Thanks,
Florian

Comments

Carlos O'Donell Oct. 16, 2017, 8:43 p.m. UTC | #1 
On 10/16/2017 12:41 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> 
>>> Should I use .90 in the tags and not .9000?  I'm asking because
>>>
>>> -#define RELEASE "stable"
>>> -#define VERSION "2.26"
>>> +#define RELEASE "development"
>>> +#define VERSION "2.26.90"
>>>
>>> we use .90 versions during development.  (I mistakenly assumed that
>>> this was something Fedora-specific.)  I switched to .9000 to avoid
>>> collisions with point-release tarballs from a long-lived release
>>> branch branch.
>>
>> Why don't we change VERSION to 2.26.9000 to make the tags match?
>>
>> The choice of .90 was always arbitrary.
>>
>> I see nothing but benefit in using a larger development revision
>> number.
> 
> Testing showed no problems caused by .9000.  I'm going to install the attached patch.
> 
> I will use .90 tags for the older development branches, and the .9000 tag for the new branch only.
 
This looks good to me. Please update the Release wiki document
to instruct the release manager to use 9000.
 
> 2017-10-16  Florian Weimer  <fweimer@redhat.com>
> 
> 	* version.h (VERSION): Switch to ".9000" as the development
> 	version suffix.
> 
> diff --git a/version.h b/version.h
> index b6a0412847..788d0c3509 100644
> --- a/version.h
> +++ b/version.h
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>  /* This file just defines the current version number of libc.  */
>  
>  #define RELEASE "development"
> -#define VERSION "2.26.90"
> +#define VERSION "2.26.9000"
diff mbox

Patch


2017-10-16  Florian Weimer  <fweimer@redhat.com>

	* version.h (VERSION): Switch to ".9000" as the development
	version suffix.

diff --git a/version.h b/version.h
index b6a0412847..788d0c3509 100644
--- a/version.h
+++ b/version.h
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ 
 /* This file just defines the current version number of libc.  */
 
 #define RELEASE "development"
-#define VERSION "2.26.90"
+#define VERSION "2.26.9000"