Am 06.10.2011 22:55, schrieb Colomban Wendling:
Le 06/10/2011 22:45, Enrico Tröger a écrit :
On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:50:06 +0200, Colomban wrote:
Le 04/10/2011 23:37, Jiří Techet a écrit :
Hi,
I'm trying to get everything ready for the conversion and there are still a few points unresolved:
I have a few comments (and questions) myself:
- Some branch names should be renamed (e.g. Geany-0_19_1) because
they have the same name as tags and they are ambiguous when doing "git checkout". Some naming scheme for stable branches should be invented.
I was proposing to have two digit branches and three digit tags:
Geany-0_19 - maintenance branch Geany-0_19_0 - tag Geany-0_19_1 - tag Geany-0_19_2 - tag
Do you agree or do you prefer some different naming scheme?
I don't mind much, but it looks sensible since it quite follows current scheme and is clear. So yes, I agree.
What about changing the underscore by a point to make the version number more familiar? I don't remember why I chose the underscore scheme but I know this decision is very, very old. Either it was back in the CVS days or early when migrating from CVS to SVN (this was in late 2005 or early 2006, IIRC). Either I was afraid using points could cause problems or I read somewhere (maybe SF docs) better to use underscores or I was just drunk. Since now, after the GIT merge all references would need to be adjusted at all or they simply die, I guess we can also change the names.
Makes sense, and actually I'd feel more natural by stripping the "Geany-" prefix and replace underscores by dots, eg:
0.19 - maintenance branch for 0.19 (if any) 0.19.0 - first 0.19 release tag 0.19.1 - second 0.19 release tag 0.19.2 - etc.
Sounds good.
Cheers, Frank