Re: [wtp-releng] I have branched map files and what you need to do about

[David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Good advice on both counts. all three
digits is best (sorry for the omission). 

It is fine (and best) to hold off committing
map files to HEAD, but should be ok to do so because I've "stopped"
the automatic builds. 
As long as everyone is careful and doesn't
substantially change one of those head map files, if we have to do a re-build
it would be fine. 
I just knew some teams were "getting
stuff ready" for 3.0.1, so wanted to stop the builds, to allow that
to go on, if teams would like. 

Thanks,

From:	Carl Anderson/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
To:	<wtp-releng@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	06/17/2008 10:43 AM
Subject:	Re: [wtp-releng] I have branched map files and what you need to        do        about it ...

---

David,

      Thanks for branching the map files.  But I have
two things to bring
up.
      First, the R3_0_maintenance map files- as we branch,
we should edit
the headers and update the following section, changing HEAD to
R3_0_maintenance:

! These bundles are currently being developed and released
! from the HEAD branch

Now, I would recommend (and I recommend that you insist) that we hold off
on updating the following section in the HEAD map files from 3.0 to 3.1
until after 3.0 is declared (lest we have a bunch of respins for no
reason):

! This map file is for
! WTP 3.0 releases

      Second, I looked back at our previous release tags.
 Can we please,
PLEASE go with R3_0_0 as the recommended tag?  (The only tag I could
find
without all three digits was R0_7 - we have used the format I am
recommending since R1_0_0.)

FWIW,

- Carl Anderson
WTP programmer


                    
                     
                     
          
             David M      
                     
                     
    
             Williams/Raleigh/    
                     
                  
             IBM@IBMUS      
                     
                     To
             Sent by:      
           Webtools releng discussion list
    
             wtp-releng-bounce    
    <wtp-releng@xxxxxxxxxxx>        
   
             s@xxxxxxxxxxx    
                     
                   cc
                    
                     
                     
          
                    
                     
                     
  Subject 
             06/17/2008 12:58    
     [wtp-releng] I have branched map    
             AM        
               files and what you
need to do       
                    
                  about it
...                    
   
                    
                     
                     
          
             Please respond to    
                     
                  
              Webtools releng  
                     
                     
              discussion list  
                     
                     
             <wtp-releng@eclip  
                     
                    
                  se.org>
                     
                     
     
                    
                     
                     
          
                    
                     
                     
          





Due to so many requests ... now, remember to visual a back seat full of
kids bouncing up and down all saying ".. really, really, we really
do have
to go ... " :)
I have branched our map files to R3_0_maintenance.
If worse comes to worst, (and we have to respin 3.0) we'll have a little
dual maintenance to do already! but .. pretty sure we won't be re-building.


>From some talks too, I wanted to clarify procedure .... if a Project
Leads
takes this time to "divide up" map files into more meaningful
components,
so that some parts may branch, other parts not, then it is required to
have
the same division in all branches of the map files. Remember the goal is
not to divide things based on whether you are branching or not ... but,
to
have meaningful chunks of things that should be branched together (or not).
[and, then, only if you decide not to branch your whole sub-project].

Lastly, another important thing that I have decided to leave up to each
project ... unlike previous years when I did it for all projects for which
I was a committer ... I highly recommend each project tag their "3.0"
code
with a meaningful, consistent tag such as "R3_0" (or, perhaps,
"R2_0" for
JSF and JPA). The reason is, it that even though we have an automatic
record of tags for each build, it is handy if you need to do "compares"
on
projects in your workspace, especially of several projects at once, to
have
a common, meaningful tag to specify. If there's ever any question in the
future, or for example we had to rebuild, we would of course use the
"official" tags of v<datetimestampe>.

As always, let us know if any of this isn't clear.

Thanks,
_______________________________________________
wtp-releng mailing list
wtp-releng@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-releng


_______________________________________________
wtp-releng mailing list
wtp-releng@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-releng