I've pushed the tag to our current HEAD on master (so as not to rewrite history).
Local testing behaves as expected, and I've got a probe patch to be extra special certain :) A simple probe patch worked as expected: https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/3053/ I think we are good :) Ed On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Florin Coras <fcoras.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > Florin > > On Nov 3, 2016, at 11:51 AM, Dave Barach (dbarach) <dbar...@cisco.com> > wrote: > > +1, hoping for no surprises... (;-)... > > *From:* vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io [mailto:vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io > <vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io>] *On Behalf Of *Luke, Chris > *Sent:* Thursday, November 3, 2016 1:29 PM > *To:* Edward Warnicke <hagb...@gmail.com>; vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> > *Subject:* Re: [vpp-dev] Tagging for vpp 17.01-rc0 > > +1 > > Makes sense to me. Gotta do it sometime and it’s just a label. > > Chris > > *From:* vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io [mailto:vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io > <vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io>] *On Behalf Of *Edward Warnicke > *Sent:* Thursday, November 03, 2016 1:07 PM > *To:* vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> > *Subject:* [vpp-dev] Tagging for vpp 17.01-rc0 > > At the time we laid the current tag for master, we thought we were doing a > 16.12 release, so the > tag was laid as: > > v16.12-rc0 > > The result is that all of our merge by merge patches for master are being > built as 16.12-rc0 packages. > > I would like to tag with > > v17.01-rc0 > > to correct that. Any objections? > > Ed > _______________________________________________ > vpp-dev mailing list > vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev > > >
_______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
