Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 07:42:50 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@GndRsh.aac.dev.com> To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: imp@village.org, andrsn@andrsn.stanford.edu, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: CVSUP vs. SNAPS Message-ID: <199710061442.HAA00246@GndRsh.aac.dev.com> In-Reply-To: <12048.875812329@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at "Oct 2, 97 10:12:09 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> But it results from an essential confusion as to what "2.2" means. > > 2.2 is the branch ID, it's not 2.2.0 as Rod seems to see it and hence > there's no "decrease" in the release number (if you had to think of it > strictly numerically then 2.2 would be equivalent to 2.2.x, where x = > infinity :). > > To put it another way, we have 3 branches right now: > > 2.1 AKA 2.1-stable > 2.2 AKA 2.2-stable > 3.0 AKA 3.0-current > > And I would expect all branches to have their BRANCH variable in > /sys/conf/newvers.sh set accordingly except for those brief periods > when an actual release was going out, at which point it would briefly Ahhhh.... your confusing things a bit, REVISION in newvers.sh != BRANCH, never did, never was meant to. BRANCH in the file infact was short cited when I created it, it's value is the one used to tweak in the ``RELEASE'', ``STABLE'' and ``CURRENT'' values, oh well, perhaps it should be called ``FLAVOR''?. > transition to RELEASE. Suddenly inventing 2.2.5-stable would be a > tragic mistake since it leads in turn to the suggestion that there's a > RELENG_2_2_5 branch tag to go with it which, of course, there is not. No, newvers.sh does not reference BRANCHes, other than the above error. It was meant to keep things clear as to what one is running, REVISION, should always be set to reflect the value of the last release done on that branch in the respective branches newvers.sh, REVSION should NEVER NEVER NEVER decrease in value! Your arguing with the person that wrote the current version of newvers.sh, who had specific intents for each of those values, and what you are doing is _not_ what was suppose to be done! > Jordan > > > In message <199710021358.GAA28556@GndRsh.aac.dev.com> "Rodney W. Grimes" writ > es: > > : You did this in the 2.1 branch when I proded you to change the > > : word ``RELEASE'' to ``STABLE'', but your commit also changed > > : 2.1.5 back to 2.1, _decreasing_ the version number, again I > > : iterate, version numbers should never decrease! > > > > Let me stand up and lend my 100% whole-hearted support to Rod's > > request. I think it is an excellent idea. > > > > Warner > > -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com Accurate Automation, Inc. Reliable computers for FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199710061442.HAA00246>