[ckan-discuss] CKAN branching policy

Fri Aug 27 09:35:01 BST 2010

Tim,

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
is tricky.

David

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'
>
> Tim
>
> 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:
>> http://knowledgeforge.net/ckan/trac/wiki/BranchingPolicy
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> David
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ckan-discuss mailing list
>> ckan-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-discuss
>
>