[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: category version limited to digits and dots

From: Milan Cvetkovic
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: category version limited to digits and dots
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 10:57:13 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030425

Greek0 wrote:
On Mon, 17 May 2004 10:53:23 -0400
Milan Cvetkovic <address@hidden> wrote:

It's not a real problem. Just call your branches that way:

Think about it. The exact names of your branches just don't matter.
You don't even have to put your version into the version field of
the branch name. Eg:


And this makes the "version part" useless.

Nevertheless, this is what I ended up with, and I can see from other posts (and archives around the "net") some other people, too.

Why didn't you use the other scheme I proposed? Actually that one was
more or less ironically to show that tla doesn't care. IMHO such names
just don't look pretty, but it's of course subjective.

The point is that I want to group branches after I decide on release number.

OK, let's see:


So, I want to say "lets see all the branches project release v1"

$ tla abrowse project--v1

but wait, I didn't want v1.1 - I only wanted v1 !

Typical develoment cycle is concentrated on small (1,2 or 3) releases at the same time, lets call them develomnet and stable. When I release stable-1.0, I don't want to do any fixes there, unless there is something I must fix - for example security patch. Typically, I would backport couple of patches from development branch back to stable branch and release stable-1.1 release.

Then I decide it is time for new stable release stable-2.0, and (after some time) all my customers upgrade their copies to the new stable. I start working on devo-3.0.

Now if I do:
tla abrowse, I would like to group branches related to devo-3.0 or stable-2.0. Nobody is interested any more for 1.0 and its patches - it is in the archive for historical reasons.

I cannot do it today, because I have a choice of:
- using branch versions as project versions -
   I would see 1.0, 1.1, 2.0 and 3.0 all grouped one after another.
- using branch names as project versions and abondoning branch-versions

The only real obstacle is that tla enfoces that third component "proj--branch--version" - version must contain only [0-9\.].

Now I know why this limitation is there (ability to do "tla get proj--branch"), but I still wish it weren't. :-)



Gnu-arch-users mailing list

GNU arch home page:

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]