And of course I've been retarded and created a '3.X' branch with is completely inconsistent with our usual branch naming. So I actually just renamed that to 'cassandra-3.X' instead. I apologize for the inconvenience if any (there hasn't been any commit since I created the branch though, so hopefully nobody was inconvenienced).
Again, my bad, but we should be good to go now. On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Sylvain Lebresne <sylv...@datastax.com> wrote: > So, this is done now and I've renamed the version on trunk to 4.0, so be > sure to commit/merge to 3.X before going to trunk from now on. > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Sylvain Lebresne <sylv...@datastax.com> > wrote: > >> As there has been no strong objection, I'm going to proceed and create >> the branch. >> >> Note that I'm discarding Michael remark as a joke due to the use of a >> smiley, but just in case that was a genuine concern, I'll argue that 1) >> 'trunk' isn't really more arithmetic friendly so I don't think there is too >> much reliance on this for branch names out there and 2) I really don't care >> about the branch name, 3.X just feels the more natural, but if something >> thing just calling it '3' or something else would be better, be my guest >> and rename it. >> >> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Michael Shuler <mich...@pbandjelly.org> >> wrote: >> >>> I foresee many arithmetic errors with 3.X.. :) >>> >>> -- >>> Michael >>> >>> On 09/27/2016 05:18 AM, Sylvain Lebresne wrote: >>> > We have a number of tickets that we now have to wait on 4.0 due to >>> needing a >>> > messaging protocol change or major sstable format ( >>> https://goo.gl/OvqNQp), >>> > and >>> > we currently have no branch for those. And as 4.0 was initially >>> supposed to >>> > come >>> > after 3.11, which is coming, it's probably time to have a home for >>> those >>> > tickets. >>> > >>> > And as 4.0 should probably be the 'trunk' (at least it's how we've >>> always >>> > done), >>> > I'm proposing to create a new '3.X' branch from trunk as home for the >>> > remaining >>> > 3.x tick-tock release. In that configuration, the merge path will >>> become: >>> > >>> > 2.1 -> 2.2 -> 3.0 -> 3.X -> trunk (future 4.0) >>> > >>> > Any strong objection to me creating that branch? >>> > >>> > Sylvain Lebresne >>> > >>> >>> >> >
