Re: [cdt-dev] Fw: CDT 2.1.1 Build I200502031120 completed

[Douglas Schaefer <dschaefe@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Actually I would call 2.1.1 a maintenance release. I remember a discussion 
that we had at one of the calls where I expressed the wish that we could 
take a build at any time on the maintenance branch and call it a 
maintenance release. We would bless it with a number when we felt good 
enough to promote it as an official release.

So for these x.x.x releases, I think it is sufficient to produce a build 
when someone requests it. If the build turns out to be pretty good, we can 
vote to bless it with a number.

The issue that comes to mind is the CVS tag. I need to make sure I tag 
these builds so I can go back and give it the release tag when we vote for 
it. I'll do this for the next 2.1.1 build (unless there have been no 
changes since then in which case I can tag it now).

We'll follow this process for the 2.0.x stream which we at IBM are 
currently using as well.

This whole releng process should be written down somewhere so I can hand 
it off some day...

Doug Schaefer
Ottawa Lab, IBM Rational Software Division



"Alain Magloire" <alain@xxxxxxx> 
Sent by: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
02/04/2005 12:13 PM
Please respond to
cdt-dev


To
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc
cdt-test-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject
Re: [cdt-dev] Fw: CDT 2.1.1 Build I200502031120 completed






> 
> Here's a 2.1.1 build. This includes the latest off of cdt_21 including 
> version number changes.

Cool!! merci bucket.

> I'm not sure we need to call it an RC0 since we 
> don't really have a formal release candidate plan, no?
> 

In the past, 2.0.{1,2} and the other minor releases
we did not have either.  The only markings were the
the PRs with a specific TargetMilesone indicating
which problems the committers were tackling.

Did you have something else in mind, in term of process, for a minor 
release ?


_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev