"main" repository

The open discussion of hosting, forum, web-sites, community organisation and open voting

Re: "main" repository

Postby vlad » Wed Oct 16, 2013 12:02 pm

Romiras wrote:In case we want to have back history, the option to create repository based on earlier BB versions. For example, start from BB 1.5, then 1.6 RC5, 1.6 RC6, 1.6.0.


Yes, nice to have all versions. On the other side there is no much sense in it - there is no history between releases anyway. You can just put released installers in one folder like "previous releases" for reference purposes.

Romiras wrote:I propose to tag OM's versions separate from community's versions and have separate branches. Thus, community can start his first version tagged, for example, as 0.9.


Why? Why not 1.7? To make it more complicated? :)
vlad
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 6:44 pm

Re: "main" repository

Postby vlad » Wed Oct 16, 2013 12:10 pm

Romiras wrote:Regarding releases of BB distribution:
I recommend to refrain from putting binaries into code repository. Instead, as proposed in document Release Your Software, create binary releases.


No, these are unrelated things.
"binary release" - it is end-user thing like installer (exe).
The repository itself is still needed even as binary files tree - to track changes. All BB sources should became text files (in my opinion) but this is a separate topic.
vlad
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 6:44 pm

Re: "main" repository

Postby Romiras » Wed Oct 16, 2013 5:25 pm

vlad wrote:
Romiras wrote:In case we want to have back history, the option to create repository based on earlier BB versions. For example, start from BB 1.5, then 1.6 RC5, 1.6 RC6, 1.6.0.


Yes, nice to have all versions. On the other side there is no much sense in it - there is no history between releases anyway. You can just put released installers in one folder like "previous releases" for reference purposes.
I mean tracking history of changes made in source code and documentation.

vlad wrote:
Romiras wrote:I propose to tag OM's versions separate from community's versions and have separate branches. Thus, community can start his first version tagged, for example, as 0.9.


Why? Why not 1.7? To make it more complicated? :)
Mainly in order not interfere with OM's versioning. In addition, a new version naming should have symbolic meaning for BB community.
Romiras
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 5:55 am
Location: Tel-Aviv

Previous

Return to Brainstorming

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron