[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipse-dev] consistent CVS tags for builds?

+1

Some teams may have a concern if they are currently using a tag format that always sorts lexicographically higher than the new proposed format. For example, lets say they are currently using 'z' instead of 'v' in their tags. When they move to the new 'v' format then their bundle versions will sort lower in the next I-Build than the previous I-Build. Is that a big concern? Its not for me since we already use tags that start with v<date>

Tom



Inactive hide details for Boris Bokowski ---04/16/2008 03:09:28 PM---The component teams seem to have different conventions forBoris Bokowski ---04/16/2008 03:09:28 PM---The component teams seem to have different conventions for CVS tag names


From:

Boris Bokowski <Boris_Bokowski@xxxxxxxxxx>

To:

eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

Date:

04/16/2008 03:09 PM

Subject:

[eclipse-dev] consistent CVS tags for builds?





The component teams seem to have different conventions for CVS tag names
when doing build submissions.  I believe that consistency is a good thing
unless there are good reasons for tag name creativity (are there any?). In
the past, we even had to re-spin builds because inconsistent tag names lead
to non-increasing bundle version numbers. (To be fair, this only happened
if one component in itself was inconsistent though.)

CVS tag names appear in bundle version numbers, in the bundle jar file name
or directory name, and in the revision history for one specific file. They
should increase lexicographically over time as long as the major, minor,
and service segment of the bundle version number does not change, i.e.
within one development stream.

I would like to be able to derive the id of the build in which it first
appeared when looking at a revision of a file in the history view, or when
looking at a particular bundle somewhere on disk.

Kim Horne has volunteered to update the releng tools if we could agree on
the following form for tags (sorry for being formal here):

"v<date>-<time><branch_opt>"

where
 date := the current date in yyyyMMdd format
 time := the current time in HHmm format
 branch_opt := "" if org.eclipse.releng is from HEAD,
                             "_<branch>" otherwise.
 branch := a compressed form of the branch from which org.eclipse.releng
is checked out.

The "compressed form" could be the first letter of the branch name followed
by any numbers in the branch name. The reason for compressing the branch
name is that tag names appear in file names and directory names, and using
the full branch name would lead to overly long names that could cause
problems on certain file systems.

For example, a regular contribution for this week's integration build would
use a tag like "v20080414-1526", and a build submission for a maintenance
build would use a tag like "v20080901-1130_R34". Looking at the first
example tag, we can tell that it was made from HEAD for a regular
integration build some time after April 14, 2008.  The second tag looks
like it would go into a maintenance build for the 3.4 maintenance stream.

Questions? Comments?

Boris

P.S. I know that this has been discussed in the past. I don't have much
hope that we can get everyone to agree on this, but I would consider it an
improvement if *most* teams would use a consistent naming scheme.

_______________________________________________
eclipse-dev mailing list
eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-dev

GIF image

GIF image