I'd rather have the 'release' commit (the one inbetween without the -SNAPSHOT) 
in the history.

Reason is that the snapshot versions might be completely different than the 
others.
We have this e.g. if you have

1.0-SNAPSHOT

then you release a 
1.0-rc3


and continue with 



1.0-SNAPSHOT

again.


LieGrue,
strub



----- Original Message -----
> From: Kristian Rosenvold <[email protected]>
> To: Maven Developers List <[email protected]>
> Cc: 
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 2:15 PM
> Subject: Re: Scm, Surefire, Wagon migrate to git (please check) [was Plan for 
> git migration]
> 
> Well the "prepare" commit is really just not needed. Viewing 
> "master"
> as a linear history the commits can go directly from
> "2.12-SNAPSHOT" to "2.13-SNAPSHOT", since 2.12 can be on its 
> own
> mini-branch, like the asf repos do.
> 
> Now of course dropping the tag would also imply reverting the commit
> version number on trunk. But there is no way to make release-plugin
> actually do this style of tagging ?
> 
> In this way  if you're a lazy guy or know way too much git you can do
> as follows:
> 
> tocuh poms to 2.12.2
> git commit -m "[maven-release-plugin] copy tag for surefire-2.12.2"
> git push origin HEAD:refs/tags/surefire-2.12.2
> touch poms to 2.13-SNAPSHOT
> git commit --amend -m"[maven-release-plugin] prepare for next 
> development"
> git push origin HEAD:master
> 
> Kristian
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2012/9/21 Stephen Connolly <[email protected]>:
>>  On 21 September 2012 12:40, Kristian Rosenvold 
> <[email protected]
>>>  wrote:
>> 
>>>  > Are we d'accord that we must _not_ do releases on master but 
> always
>>>  create a temporary branch for each release (and then merge back to 
> master
>>>  after the vote passed) ?
>>> 
>>>  Now it's getting interesting:
>>> 
>>>  git clone git://git.apache.org/maven-surefire.git
>>>  cd maven-surefire
>>>  gitk --all &
>>> 
>>>  git clone https://github.com/sonatype/plexus-utils.git
>>>  cd plexus-utils
>>>  gitk --all &
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  Hold the two gitk windows side by side;)
>>> 
>>>  Now the tags in surefire seem like the textbook way to do this,
>>>  whereas plexus-utils has ugly tags. But is there any way to have
>>>  release-plugin actually *make* tags like surefire has ? (these are
>>>  from the asf git clone, so they have been created by some dark
>>>  magics...)
>>> 
>> 
>>  I think this is a side-effect of the svn-git migration
>> 
>>  the plexus ones are where the tag is created on the master branch
>> 
>>  the surefire ones are where the tag is created from a separate branch (i.e.
>>  the tag)
>> 
>>  to have the history like this in git you would do something like
>> 
>>  git commit -m "[maven-release-plugin] prepare release 
> surefire-2.12.2"
>>  git checkout -b temp
>>  touch the git properties to refelect the new svn revision
>>  git commit -m "[maven-release-plugin] copy tag for 
> surefire-2.12.2"
>>  git tag surefire-2.12.2
>>  git checkout master
>>  update poms
>>  git commit -m "[maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development
>>  iteration"
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>>  Kristian
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  >
>>>  > LieGrue,
>>>  > strub
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  > ----- Original Message -----
>>>  >> From: Kristian Rosenvold <[email protected]>
>>>  >> To: Maven Developers List <[email protected]>
>>>  >> Cc:
>>>  >> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 10:33 AM
>>>  >> Subject: Re: Scm, Surefire, Wagon migrate to git (please 
> check) [was
>>>  Plan for git migration]
>>>  >>
>>>  >> You don't really "crash" anything, but if the 
> tag is rewritten you
>>>  >> have to delete the local tag to actually get the updated 
> reference to
>>>  >> the tag.
>>>  >>
>>>  >> The authorative repo is correct, but there may be some clones 
> out
>>>  >> there that are unaware of the failed release and the moved 
> tag.
>>>  >>
>>>  >> I still think the benefit of moving the tag > just tagging 
> locally
>>>  >> (and hence missing tags).
>>>  >>
>>>  >> Could we introduce something like subtagging ? If the official 
> release
>>>  >> tag is "xyz_plugin_1.2.3", could we have the release 
> plugin tag the
>>>  >> first version as "xyz_plugin_1.2.3_0" and just 
> automatically advance
>>>  >> the tag for each re-release ? Then we *could* have some 
> automated step
>>>  >> in the post-vote process burniung the final release number 
> based on
>>>  >> highest available subtag (and delete the subtags) ?
>>>  >>
>>>  >> I suppose a similar post-vote tool could also just push the 
> local
>>>  >> release tag to the repo, so I may be complicating things.....?
>>>  >>
>>>  >> Kristian
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >> 2012/9/20 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>:
>>>  >>>  Hi folks!
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>>  The problem is the rollback.
>>>  >>>  In DeltaSpike we do _not_ push now. deleting a tag on one 
> repo is not
>>>  a
>>>  >> problem, but you would crash all downstream clones as 
> re-trying a
>>>  release is
>>>  >> basically a history rewrite.
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>>  In DeltaSpike I do the release locally and push the tag + 
> release
>>>  branch to
>>>  >> my github clone (or any other public repo you like).
>>>  >>>  After the VOTE passes I merge it to master and push it to 
> the ASF
>>>  canonical
>>>  >> repo.
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>>  Not perfect neither, but worked far better than history 
> rewrites at
>>>  least
>>>  >> ;)
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>>  LieGrue,
>>>  >>>  strub
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>>  >>>>  From: Kristian Rosenvold 
> <[email protected]>
>>>  >>>>  To: Maven Developers List 
> <[email protected]>
>>>  >>>>  Cc:
>>>  >>>>  Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 4:56 PM
>>>  >>>>  Subject: Re: Scm, Surefire, Wagon migrate to git 
> (please check) [was
>>>  >> Plan for git migration]
>>>  >>>>
>>>  >>>>  I just checked and there is no general blocking for 
> deleting tags. We
>>>  >>>>  should definitely push as part of release plugin. 
> Tags ar cheap.
>>>  >>>>
>>>  >>>>  Kristian
>>>  >>>>
>>>  >>>>
>>>  >>>>  2012/9/20 Olivier Lamy <[email protected]>:
>>>  >>>>>   2012/9/20 Mark Derricutt 
> <[email protected]>:
>>>  >>>>>>   Olivier,
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>   I'm not checked yet ( not thru lazyness, 
> but thru
>>>  >> buzyness, and
>>>  >>>>  shooting this email just as I think of it ), in all 
> my local
>>>  maven/git
>>>  >> projects
>>>  >>>>  I set in the maven-release-plugin configuration:
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>   <pushChanges>false</pushChanges>
>>>  >>>>>>  
> <localCheckout>true</localCheckout>
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>   to prevent any upstream/origin pushes during 
> release ( there
>>>  >> may not BE
>>>  >>>>  an origin/remote yet ). There was some discussion 
> either on here, or
>>>  in
>>>  >> JIRA (
>>>  >>>>  not sure off hand which ) about making these options 
> the default for
>>>  >> any of the
>>>  >>>>  supported distributed version control systems.
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>   Does anyone know if this was done? Should 
> these options be
>>>  >> mandated as
>>>  >>>>  a standard practise for maven+git conversion?
>>>  >>>>>
>>>  >>>>>   No release yet.
>>>  >>>>>   But regarding 
> <pushChanges>false</pushChanges>, I
>>>  >> remember we
>>>  >>>>  used on
>>>  >>>>>   jenkins side and everybody missed the manual 
> step (push the tag)
>>>  >> when
>>>  >>>>>   released. So we moved to true.
>>>  >>>>>   BTW it's something to discuss.
>>>  >>>>>   Maybe pushing the tag once release vote passed ?
>>>  >>>>>   I remember some discussions on ASF infra for 
> blocking of tag
>>>  >> deletion
>>>  >>>>>   (I don't know if this has been applied on 
> the final infra)
>>>  >> because we
>>>  >>>>>   sometimes delete tags if the release vote fail.
>>>  >>>>>   I can test creating a fake tag and try delete it 
> :-)
>>>  >>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>   Mark
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>   On 20/09/2012, at 1:40 AM, Olivier Lamy
>>>  >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>   BTW I have started a page here:
>>>  >>>>>>>  
> http://maven.apache.org/developers/conventions/git.html
>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>   we could put some git tips and more 
> conventions.
>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>   2012/9/18 Arnaud Héritier 
> <[email protected]>:
>>>  >>>>>>>>   My remarks about these repos :
>>>  >>>>>>>>   * trunk will have to be renamed 
> master (I'm not
>>>  >> sure if
>>>  >>>>  we'll go further
>>>  >>>>>>>>   like using the git workflow with the 
> develop branch to
>>>  >> keep
>>>  >>>>  master as
>>>  >>>>>>>>   stable as possible - In any case I 
> would recommand to
>>>  >> follow a
>>>  >>>>  convention
>>>  >>>>>>>>   fix/XXXX, stable/A.B.C, feature/ZZZZ 
> to organize
>>>  >> branches)
>>>  >>>>>>>>   * A strange thing I didn't have 
> in my company
>>>  >> repositories
>>>  >>>>  I recently
>>>  >>>>>>>>   migrated is the commit/tag (copy for 
> tag) for each
>>>  >> release done
>>>  >>>>  by the
>>>  >>>>>>>>   release plugin. I don't know if 
> it is a different
>>>  >> setting
>>>  >>>>  in the plugin or
>>>  >>>>>>>>   something cleaned by filters I 
> applied in the SVN
>>>  >> -> GIT
>>>  >>>>  migration we did
>>>  >>>>>>>>   * Some strange branches to cleanup ? 
> ASF, APACHE or by
>>>  >> user
>>>  >>>>  (trygvis,
>>>  >>>>>>>>   evenisse ...)
>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>   That's all what I see for now.
>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>   Cheers
>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>   On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 8:29 PM, 
> Arnaud Héritier
>>>  >>>>  <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>   I Will test them. Will they keep 
> these ugly URLs
>>>  >> git-wip-us
>>>  >>>>  in the
>>>  >>>>>>>>>   future ? I'm not a fanatic 
> but I would prefer
>>>  >> to have
>>>  >>>>  something stable
>>>  >>>>>>>>>   to put in our POMs for releases. 
> I know that we
>>>  >> don't
>>>  >>>>  use often scm
>>>  >>>>>>>>>   infos after the release but it 
> is sad if we know
>>>  >> that
>>>  >>>>  they'll be
>>>  >>>>>>>>>   discontinued in a near future. 
> No ?
>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>   Le 18 sept. 2012 à 19:23, 
> Olivier Lamy
>>>  >>>>  <[email protected]> a écrit :
>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   Repositories has been 
> migrated to:
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   *
>>>  >>>>  
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/maven-surefire.git
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   *
>>>  >>>>  
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/maven-wagon.git
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   *
>>>  >> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/maven-scm.git
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   They are currently read 
> only.
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   Content looks good.
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   If nobody complains, I will 
> ask to move to rw
>>>  >> mode
>>>  >>>>  tomorrow. (in 24H)
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   2012/9/18 Olivier Lamy
>>>  >> <[email protected]>:
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>   Hi
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>   See
>>>  >>>>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5266
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>   Those tree svn paths 
> will be readonly now
>>>  >> for
>>>  >>>>  migration.
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>   2012/9/12 Olivier Lamy
>>>  >> <[email protected]>:
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>   Hi Folks,
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>   So the vote passed, 
> now it's time
>>>  >> for
>>>  >>>>  volunteers to use their fingers
>>>  >>>>>>>>>   :-).
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>   I have started a 
> page [1] for ETA of
>>>  >> migration
>>>  >>>>  (note the Volunteer
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>   column :-) ) and for 
> discussion on
>>>  >> some stuff
>>>  >>>>  (plugins shared)
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>   Thanks
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>   --
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>   Olivier Lamy
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>   Talend: 
> http://coders.talend.com
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>  
> http://twitter.com/olamy |
>>>  >>>>  http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>>   [1]
>>>  >>>>  
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Git+Migration
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>   --
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>   Olivier Lamy
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>   Talend: 
> http://coders.talend.com
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>>  http://twitter.com/olamy 
> |
>>>  >>>>  http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   --
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   Olivier Lamy
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   Talend: 
> http://coders.talend.com
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>  http://twitter.com/olamy |
>>>  >> http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>  
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>>  >>>>  [email protected]
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>   For additional commands, 
> e-mail:
>>>  >>>>  [email protected]
>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>   --
>>>  >>>>>>>>   -----
>>>  >>>>>>>>   Arnaud Héritier
>>>  >>>>>>>>   06-89-76-64-24
>>>  >>>>>>>>  http://aheritier.net
>>>  >>>>>>>>   Mail/GTalk: [email protected]
>>>  >>>>>>>>   Twitter/Skype : aheritier
>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>   --
>>>  >>>>>>>   Olivier Lamy
>>>  >>>>>>>   Talend: http://coders.talend.com
>>>  >>>>>>>  http://twitter.com/olamy | 
> http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>  
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  >>>>>>>   To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> [email protected]
>>>  >>>>>>>   For additional commands, e-mail: 
> [email protected]
>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  >>>>>>   To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> [email protected]
>>>  >>>>>>   For additional commands, e-mail: 
> [email protected]
>>>  >>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>
>>>  >>>>>
>>>  >>>>>
>>>  >>>>>   --
>>>  >>>>>   Olivier Lamy
>>>  >>>>>   Talend: http://coders.talend.com
>>>  >>>>>  http://twitter.com/olamy | 
> http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>>  >>>>>
>>>  >>>>>
>>>  >> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  >>>>>   To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> [email protected]
>>>  >>>>>   For additional commands, e-mail: 
> [email protected]
>>>  >>>>>
>>>  >>>>
>>>  >>>>  
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  >>>>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> [email protected]
>>>  >>>>  For additional commands, e-mail: 
> [email protected]
>>>  >>>>
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>>  
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  >>>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>  >>>  For additional commands, e-mail: 
> [email protected]
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>
>>>  >> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>  >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>  >>
>>>  >
>>>  > 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>  > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>  >
>>> 
>>>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>  For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to