Rene, Remi, I read back the thread and have another answer on this for you; The branch contains a point version number instead of a x.y.z-SNAPSHOT, without the branch a revert commit must follow if we vote them out. a branch can be simply neglected.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Remi Bergsma <r...@remi.nl> wrote: > Hi René, > > The reason is that I tried to stay close to how it is done now so we could > reuse the scrips. > > You do have a valid point, as indeed no commits are expected (nor should be > allowed) until the vote passes. > > Pinging @dahn to ask if he knows of other reasons to use a branch for RC and > if he foresees any issues if we'd switch to a release tag instead (and branch > off of it once vote passes). > > Regards, Remi > > >> On 02 Jul 2015, at 16:16, Rene Moser <m...@renemoser.net> wrote: >> >> Hi Remi >> >>> On 02.07.2015 13:46, Remi Bergsma wrote: >>> I talked to several people over the past weeks and wrote this wiki article: >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Release+principles+for+Apache+CloudStack >>> >>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Release+principles+for+Apache+CloudStack> >>> >>> If you like this way of working, I volunteer to be your RM :-) >> >> It is always good to see this release process which looks +/- identical >> to successful Linux kernel release process. :) >> >> The only thing I am curious about, if I get it right: >> >> Why do you branch off for RC? Why not just "tag" a commit in branch >> master as RC and branch off once it is releases from a release tag v.x.y? >> >> Because it is unlikely you make any commits on that branch anyway. Or >> did I miss anything? >> >> Yours >> René >> >> >> -- Daan
