Forum OpenACS Improvement Proposals (TIPs): Re: TIP #46: (Proposed) Rules for Version Numbering and CVS tagging of Packages

2: Re: TIP #46: (Proposed) Rules for Version Numbering and CVS tagging of Packages (response to 1)

Posted by Malte Sussdorff on 02/04/04 12:08 PM

I got a minor problem with 10). If I want to checkout OpenACS 5.2 then I need to issue two commands, on with the tag openacs-5-2-0 and one with the tag openacs-5-2-0-compat. Unless there is a compelling reason, don't have me do this.

3: Re: TIP #46: (Proposed) Rules for Version Numbering and CVS tagging of Packages (response to 2)

Posted by Joel Aufrecht on 02/04/04 01:07 PM

No, you do a single cvs checkout with tag openacs-5-2-0-compat.

The core files are tagged twice in this scheme:
- openacs-5-2-0
- openacs-5-2-0-compat

And the files in an application, such as photo-album, are tagged:
- package-2-0-0
- openacs-5-2-0-compat

One other thing that wasn't super-clear in my original post is that the package keyword is literally that, not a placeholder for, e.g., "photo-album" and "file-storage" and everything else. There should never be any file tagged photo-album-2-0-0. So if you checked out package-2-0-0 across the whole repository, you should get version 2.0.0 of each package, which bears no particular relationship to OpenACS core - it would be a meaningless thing to do.

4: Re: TIP #46: (Proposed) Rules for Version Numbering and CVS tagging of Packages (response to 3)

Posted by Malte Sussdorff on 02/04/04 01:32 PM

Thanks for clarification. Second question arose. If it does not have any resemblence to Core and nothing is guaranteed to work together, why doe we tag the package "package-2-0-0" instead of "photo-album-2-0-0". Why do we tag them in the first place? The only concern to us should be the tag for the releases (openacs-5-2-0-compat) not additional arbitrary ones (at least this is my only concern, which has been solved). I don't mind putting your package tagging into place, but we should not enforce the tagging of packages except with the openacs-x-y-z-compat tag.

As I do not think seperate package tagging (either way) is an obstacle, I approve.