On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 05:53:31PM -0500, Chris Ball wrote:
>   > It would make it much easier on the Debian package maintainer if
>   > the Bugs Everywhere project would make conventional tarball
>   > releases, with conventional version numbers, with a changelog
>   > describing what has changed between versions.
> How do people feel about pushing for a 1.0 release, with Trevor's tree
> plus a finished cfbe merge?  Or would we rather wait until afterwards
> to try for cfbe?

Sounds good to me.  Not that my tree is much ahead of the trunk at the
moment.  We've talked over most of these issues a few times, so I'll
just summarize where I think we stand on the steps needed to make a
release.

** cfbe integration

Postpone until we work out bzr/hg versioning [1]?

** Conventional version number

Set to "1.0.0" using libbe.version._VERSION.

** NEWS file

Depending on our level of masochism, either something starting out
along the lines of [2]
  bzr log --gnu-changelog -n1 -r 200..
(commit 200, or
  aaron.bentley@utoronto.ca-20060411035623-9b8d222282a26ce1
 was the last time anyone touched the NEWS file),
or a much abbreviated entry [3,4], along the lines of my current NEWS
file (changed just a few minutes ago).

** Tag bzr commit

  bzr tag 1.0.0

** Create tarball

From Ben[5]:
  bzr export /tmp/be-1.0.0.tar.gz


References:

[1]
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 05:38:03PM -0400, Steve Losh wrote:
> On Jul 21, 2009, at 9:59 AM, W. Trevor King wrote:
> > Steve's also versioning it with Mercurial.  Will he mind changing to
> > Bazaar?
>
> Yeah, I've tried bazaar but really don't like the interface at all.  If 
> everyone else really wants me to move it over I guess I can though.

[2]
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:05:38AM -0400, Chris Ball wrote:
> Actually, there's a `bzr log --gnu-changelog` now, and `bzr help
> log-formats` offers some more styles.  (None of them seem to match
> my preferred style for release announcements exactly, which would
> be `git shortlog`-style.)

[3]
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 07:21:10PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> I actually don't think the commit log needs to be part of the release at
> all. It's of interest only to those who want fine-level detail about
> changes to every file, and for that purpose I think read access to the
> VCS is much better. Packaging a static copy of the commit log as plain
> text seems pointless.
> 
> Rather, we should treat a user-changes level “NEWS” file (or whatever
> name we choose for it) as part of the documentation, and set the
> expectation among the team that it will be updated for each user-visible
> change being worked on, like any other documentation.

[4]
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:11:31AM -0400, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>    > That's not a changelog, that's a commit log of every source-level
>    > commit made. Far too much detail for a changelog of
>    > *user-visible* changes associated with a release.
> 
> I think I agree with both of you. :) It seems like it's both true that
> there's no point in keeping a GNU-style ChangeLog these days, and that
> if we make a release we should write an announce mail that directly
> mentions new user-visible changes as well as attaching the commit log.
> That smaller list of highly user-visible changes could live in NEWS,
> or in the announce mail, or both.

[5]
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:54:05AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Even better: ‘bzr export /tmp/foo.tar.gz’ will create a source tarball
> of all the files in the branch's VCS inventory. All we need to do is
> start the practice of tagging a release in the VCS, and export the
> tarball at that time.

-- 
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