[ckan-discuss] CKAN branching policy
david.read at okfn.org
Fri Aug 27 09:35:01 BST 2010
Thanks for this - good suggestion, as ever.
One thing though: the 'metastable' branch has a mixture of alphas,
betas and full releases on at different times, so better branch name
On 26 August 2010 20:01, Tim McNamara <paperless at timmcnamara.co.nz> wrote:
> I agree with the principle, but find the terminology somewhat awkward.
> Audibly and visually distinguishing between the branches will make
> communication easier.
> I would map things this way:
> 'metastable' => 'beta'
> 'stable' => 'stable'
> 'ultrastable' => 'mature'
> On 27 August 2010 02:43, David Read <david.read at okfn.org> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> I've drafted a Branching Policy to help us codifying use of Mercurial
>> branches for CKAN releases and bug-fixes:
>> It reflects the system they use to develop different Python versions (
>> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0374/#backport ), but instead of
>> naming branches after their version numbers, they are named after the
>> maturity of the version, which suits our more frequent releases. This
>> allows 'metastable' to always to be a beta, 'stable' to be the latest
>> solid release and 'ultrastable' to be the previous-but-one release.
>> We'd love to know if anyone has any thoughts or suggestions.
>> ckan-discuss mailing list
>> ckan-discuss at lists.okfn.org
More information about the ckan-discuss