Re: uploading and tagging version 5.2.0?

[John W. Eaton]

On 1/28/20 2:50 PM, Mike Miller wrote:

> which is exactly what I would have hoped to see for this release as
> well.
>
> Personally, I would prefer that the stable branch builds version 5.1.91
> or 5.1.92 until a single commit changes the version to 5.2.0, followed
> by a commit that tags it, followed by another that changes the version
> to 5.2.1. This is how we decided to do it starting with version 5.1.0.
>
> For example, this sequence of commits for version 5.1.0 updated the
> version, tagged the release, and updated the version again
>
>    https://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/d05d6eebde10
>    https://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/5d9316571d91
>    https://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/5d27954485ed

I agree and would also prefer to see this sequence of commits in the 
mercurial archive for a releases.  But I won't worry too much about it 
if the commits in the archive don't happen in exactly this sequence. 
The important thing for me is that the release that is tagged in the 
mercurial archive is exactly what was used to create the tar file that 
is distributed from ftp.gnu.org.  We should know which revision to use 
to recreate the files on ftp.gnu.org from the mercurial sources if needed.

jwe