Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tag modulesync_config 'releases' #81

Closed
juniorsysadmin opened this issue Feb 28, 2016 · 7 comments
Closed

Tag modulesync_config 'releases' #81

juniorsysadmin opened this issue Feb 28, 2016 · 7 comments

Comments

@juniorsysadmin
Copy link
Member

If we perform modulesync to get modules to a 'consistent' baseline, we are currently making changes to modulesync_config quite often and therefore the 'baseline' is changing quite a lot depending on the commit.

Start tagging modulesync_config (ignore Semantic versioning) so that we can then do things like eg. "Modulesync with modulesync_config v0.0.5"

@bastelfreak
Copy link
Member

👍 for tagging, but maybe not vX.Y.Z because this always reminds me on semantic versioning, what about date tagging like YYYY-MM-DD?

@juniorsysadmin
Copy link
Member Author

We can still have 'semantic' versioning but only bump the minor version number, which implies that breaking changes can always happen between versions. eg. 0.1.0, 0.2.0...0.40.0 etc . I find dot numbering easier to remember than dates...

@rnelson0
Copy link
Member

rnelson0 commented Mar 3, 2016 via email

@bastelfreak
Copy link
Member

ah right, 👍 for vX.Y.Z

@jyaworski
Copy link
Member

Do we care about modules being on the same version of modulesync_config? Honest question. Modulesync is ad-hoc as-is.

@rnelson0
Copy link
Member

rnelson0 commented Mar 3, 2016 via email

@juniorsysadmin
Copy link
Member Author

Alright, I've pushed a tag 0.1.0 for the current state of master. Let's see how this works in practice.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants