[Nut-upsdev] backporting changes from the trunk [was: Re: [Nut-upsuser] 2.2.2-pre2 64 bit rpm tested on openSUSE 10.3]

[Arnaud Quette]

2008/5/12 Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com>:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Arnaud Quette <aquette.dev at gmail.com> wrote:
>  > fellows,
>  >
>  >  2008/4/23, Arjen de Korte <nut+devel at de-korte.org>:
>  >
>
> >  > I'm not so sure about that last remark. Most problems only surface when we
>  >  >  release a new version. Fortunately, some people are testing the -pre
>  >  >  versions as well, so this also gives valueable feedback. On the other
>  >  >  hand, the feedback we get from the SVN versions in the trunk/ and
>  >  >  branches/Testing/ has been limited (if any at all).
>  >  >
>  >  >  The best (only?) feedback for SVN is from the buildbot's, but we don't
>  >  >  need to have separate versions in trunk/ and branches/Testing/ for that. I
>  >  >  really think that having both trunk/ and branches/Testing/ is a burden
>  >  >  now, instead of something that serves a purpose.
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >  >  > Assuming that we copy the 2.4.x branch from the trunk, we will have a
>  >  >  > better chance at making sure things don't slip through the cracks,
>  >  >  > since we will effectively start from a clean slate at that point.
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >  > Personally, I think we would be better off without branches/Testing/ at
>  >  >  all and pulling the -pre(x) and -stable versions from the trunk/ directly.
>  >  >  New developments should be put in a branches/<new name>/ and be merged
>  >  >  back in the trunk when finalized. By doing so, it would be a lot clearer
>  >  >  to separate bug fixes and new developments.
>  >
>  >  it's cool that you've written down what I've in mind.
>  >  I've too much bothered you with the current process, forcing us to
>  >  backport too many things from the trunk to Testing, and wasting our
>  >  precious time.
>  >
>  >  I still have to think a bit more on the schedule, but I'll make an
>  >  announce once 2.2.2 is out to rework the dev. process and allow us to
>  >  focus on the real points.
>
>  One thing I just noticed with the recent backport of packaging/debian
>  from branches/Testing is that we will probably want to keep separate
>  versions of packaging/debian for internal testing versus official
>  releases. Right now, "debuild -us -uc" from the trunk (rev 1490)
>  generates debs with version 2.2.2-1.

yep, I still have no final solution for this.
but something like "X.Y-dev" (ex: 2.2-dev) while sitting on the trunk
might be good, and possibly using the svn version for packages too.

comments?!

Arnaud
-- 
Linux / Unix Expert R&D - MGE Office Protection Systems - http://www.mgeops.com
Network UPS Tools (NUT) Project Leader - http://www.networkupstools.org/
Debian Developer - http://people.debian.org/~aquette/
Free Software Developer - http://arnaud.quette.free.fr/