Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 02:46:07PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Plan A >> Just drop stable point releases. >> (-) No more release notes >> (-) Lack of reference points to compare installations >> >> Plan B >> Push date-based tags across supported projects from time to time. >> (-) Encourages to continue using same version across the board >> (-) Almost as much work as making proper releases >> >> Plan C >> Let projects randomly tag point releases whenever >> (-) Still a bit costly in terms of herding cats >> >> Plan D >> Drop stable point releases, publish per-commit tarballs >> (-) Requires some infra changes, takes some storage space >> >> Plans B, C and D also require some release note / changelog generation >> from data maintained *within* the repository. >> >> [...] > > I don't see a whole lot of difference between plan A and D. > Publishing per-commit tarballs is merely saving the downstream > users the need to run a 'git archive' command, and providing > some auto-generated changelog that's already available from > 'git log'.
I guess the main difference is that we would still "release" something (i.e. generate, version, publish and archive a tarball) in case of D, which makes it easier to reuse a known point. It would also exhibit version numbers more visibly, which makes referencing them slightly easier (currently you have to look into the generated, transient $PROJECT-stable-$SERIES.tar.gz tarball to see that version number). -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
