From 9ef8e376212786d8a99cfa19bfcd9c6e70735d0a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "W. Trevor King" Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 15:22:09 -0400 Subject: I imported a few threads from the mailing list as wishlist bugs. 12c:uw: Bug aggregation. Multi-repo meta-BE? 529:ow: How should we version BE? 2f0:aw: Static html report generation 22b:aw: Sorting targets chronologically d99:aw: CherryPy interface "Cherry-flavored BE" e08:aw: Interactive email interface --- .../a845096e-3cdf-41ed-a0e3-283439665b92/body | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+) create mode 100644 .be/bugs/529c290e-b1cf-4800-be7e-68f1ecb9565c/comments/a845096e-3cdf-41ed-a0e3-283439665b92/body (limited to '.be/bugs/529c290e-b1cf-4800-be7e-68f1ecb9565c/comments/a845096e-3cdf-41ed-a0e3-283439665b92/body') diff --git a/.be/bugs/529c290e-b1cf-4800-be7e-68f1ecb9565c/comments/a845096e-3cdf-41ed-a0e3-283439665b92/body b/.be/bugs/529c290e-b1cf-4800-be7e-68f1ecb9565c/comments/a845096e-3cdf-41ed-a0e3-283439665b92/body new file mode 100644 index 0000000..33a8d66 --- /dev/null +++ b/.be/bugs/529c290e-b1cf-4800-be7e-68f1ecb9565c/comments/a845096e-3cdf-41ed-a0e3-283439665b92/body @@ -0,0 +1,51 @@ +I don't think anyone's changing their mind ;), so tallying the +comments so far: + +On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:54:05AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: +> I still disagree that a timestamp is the right thing to use there. If +> you want a monotonically-increasing indicator of which revision we're up +> to, that's immediately available with the revision number from VCS on +> the main branch. That also has the advantage of producing consecutive +> numbers for each revision, by definition. + ++1 for trunk version number. + +On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 05:27:52PM +0200, Elena of Valhalla wrote: +> I also have a weak preference for version numbers, as long as they +> give useful informations on the state the release. + ++1 for trunk version number. + +On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 02:29:10PM -0400, Aaron Bentley wrote: +> We don't do that. We have official releases every 4 weeks, but we do +> believe that running bzr.dev is pretty safe, because it's always tested +> and our test suite is quite thorough. + ++1 for by hand version bumps. + +On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 11:37:49PM +0200, Gianluca Montecchi wrote: +> The version number of trunk _is_ should be the official version number of the +> Bugs Everywhere releases. +> The version number in branch does not means nothing outside the branch. +> At least we can have a mechanism to build a version number scheme that is +> consistent for us to be able to merge branch easily. + ++1 for trunk version number. + +And me with my timestamps ;). + +Sounds like we should go with trunk version number, but that it should +be set by hand whenever Chris decides to release something, since the +rest of us don't know what version the trunk is on. Unless we do +something like: + bzr log -n 0 | grep -B2 'nick: be$' | head -n1 | sed 's/ *revno: \([0-9]*\).*/\1/' +to extract the last trunk commit referenced from our branch. + +Implementation preferences? (i.e. Chris vs. regexp matching :p) + +-- +This email may be signed or encrypted with GPG (http://www.gnupg.org). +The GPG signature (if present) will be attached as 'signature.asc'. +For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy + +My public key is at http://www.physics.drexel.edu/~wking/pubkey.txt -- cgit