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

Reply via email to