[Swift-devel] swift versions
Mihael Hategan
hategan at mcs.anl.gov
Thu Oct 7 17:05:22 CDT 2010
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 15:26 -0600, Michael Wilde wrote:
> ----- "Justin M Wozniak" <wozniak at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
> > Yes, but I think that 1.0 is a release candidate- right? New material
> >
> > will go into trunk until we branch for 1.1 .
>
> Justin, can you clarify this? I think we want to take most or all of
> whats in the trunk *now*, and branch that for 1.0. That has not been
> done yet, has it?
It has. For a long time. We have not yet released branches/1.0.
>
> If not, lets discuss when to make the branch, and especially how to test.
>
> If its already been done, lets make sure we have all we want/need from trunk in the release branch.
>
> I'm eager to see a 1.0 very soon.
>
> - Mike
>
> >
> > On Thu, 7 Oct 2010, Sarah Kenny wrote:
> >
> > > sounds good.
> > >
> > > just want to verify (sorry to beat this to death):
> > >
> > > so, we alias the 'main guide' to 0.9 (as suggested) and any changes
> > we make
> > > will go to the doc in branches/1.0 which will then be the new alias
> > for the
> > > 'main guide' once we do the release.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Justin M Wozniak
> > <wozniak at mcs.anl.gov>wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Yup.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, 7 Oct 2010, Mihael Hategan wrote:
> > >>
> > >> To summarize:
> > >>>
> > >>> There is a 1-1 mapping between branches and docs. One of the
> > branches
> > >>> (corresponding to the current release) gets linked from "main"
> > (i.e.
> > >>> main docs are the docs for the current release). So:
> > >>>
> > >>> branches/0.9 <-> 0.9 docs
> > >>> banches/0.8 <-> 0.8 docs
> > >>> trunk <-> trunk docs
> > >>>
> > >>> If current release is 0.9, then main docs = 0.9 docs.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 15:30 -0500, Justin M Wozniak wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> I meant release branch. The valid branches could be hard-coded
> > into the
> > >>>> update.sh script. The main guide would be the doc associated
> > with the
> > >>>> current version. So right now, "main guide" would be aliased to
> > 0.9 .
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Thu, 7 Oct 2010, Sarah Kenny wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> was thinking of what justin said, "I propose we have one web
> > site but
> > >>>>> multiple docs/guides directories, all accessible from the
> > docs/index.php
> > >>>>> page. Each of these would be associated with a branch"
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> i was assuming that whatever branch(es) these were associated
> > with, that
> > >>>>> doc
> > >>>>> would somehow need to make its way to a main guide that we are
> > pointing
> > >>>>> users to.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> ?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Mihael Hategan
> > <hategan at mcs.anl.gov>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 14:55 -0500, Sarah Kenny wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> so, in that case the 'main user doc' would be something
> > *like*
> > >>>>>>> http://www.ci.uchicago.edu/swift/docs10/index.php ?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> and THAT would include the updates from all the current
> > branches
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> define "all current branches". We have:
> > >>>>>> 1. Release branches
> > >>>>>> 2. Trunk
> > >>>>>> 3. Development branches (which are transient entities and only
> > there to
> > >>>>>> make trunk's life easier).
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> merged into it once we do a release?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Mihael Hategan
> > <hategan at mcs.anl.gov>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 14:39 -0500, Sarah Kenny wrote:
> > >>>>>>> > so, in this scenario, the changes to the doc that exist
> > in
> > >>>>>>> each branch
> > >>>>>>> > are pushed to the main user doc when we do the release
> > or am
> > >>>>>>> i missing
> > >>>>>>> > a step here?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> That or we really have no "main doc" and instead we
> > link from
> > >>>>>>> every
> > >>>>>>> release. Though I feel odd about that.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> >
> > >>>>>>> > On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Mihael Hategan
> > >>>>>>> <hategan at mcs.anl.gov>
> > >>>>>>> > wrote:
> > >>>>>>> >
> > >>>>>>> > On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 14:28 -0500, Justin M
> > Wozniak
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> > > On Thu, 7 Oct 2010, Sarah Kenny wrote:
> > >>>>>>> > >
> > >>>>>>> > >> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Mihael Hategan
> > >>>>>>> > <hategan at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> > >>
> > >>>>>>> > >>> Right. I think 1.0/4.1.7 should go out soon.
> > >>>>>>> > >>
> > >>>>>>> > >> ok, so i guess we should decide what 'soon'
> > >>>>>>> means ;) i am
> > >>>>>>> > currently going
> > >>>>>>> > >> thru the old bugs in bugzilla (at least trying
> > >>>>>>> to close
> > >>>>>>> > out things that have
> > >>>>>>> > >> been already fixed or are no-longer applicable,
> > >>>>>>> etc), but
> > >>>>>>> > perhaps it would
> > >>>>>>> > >> be good to determine if there are bigger issues
> > >>>>>>> outside of
> > >>>>>>> > that that still
> > >>>>>>> > >> need to be dealt with before we can put what
> > >>>>>>> we've got
> > >>>>>>> > into a stable release
> > >>>>>>> > >> and determine a time-frame...anything come to
> > >>>>>>> mind?
> > >>>>>>> > >>
> > >>>>>>> > >> as far as documentation...does it make sense
> > for
> > >>>>>>> each
> > >>>>>>> > branch to have a full
> > >>>>>>> > >> copy of /ci/www/projects/swift under it which
> > >>>>>>> can then be
> > >>>>>>> > merged with the
> > >>>>>>> > >> main/live copy whenever the code is merged?
> > >>>>>>> admittedly, i
> > >>>>>>> > know nothing about
> > >>>>>>> > >> docbook, but from the standpoint of updating
> > and
> > >>>>>>> merging
> > >>>>>>> > this seems to make
> > >>>>>>> > >> sense to me (though feel free to suggest
> > another
> > >>>>>>> way :)
> > >>>>>>> > >>
> > >>>>>>> > >> ~sk
> > >>>>>>> > >
> > >>>>>>> > > I was looking at the update.sh script earlier
> > >>>>>>> today- I
> > >>>>>>> > propose we have one
> > >>>>>>> > > web site but multiple docs/guides directories,
> > all
> > >>>>>>> > accessible from the
> > >>>>>>> > > docs/index.php page. Each of these would be
> > >>>>>>> associated with
> > >>>>>>> > a branch.
> > >>>>>>> > > So, similar to the existing "Historical" section
> > >>>>>>> but for
> > >>>>>>> > "future" branches
> > >>>>>>> > > as well. That would take a small modification
> > to
> > >>>>>>> the
> > >>>>>>> > update.sh script and
> > >>>>>>> > > manual modification of the docs/index.php page
> > for
> > >>>>>>> each
> > >>>>>>> > version number.
> > >>>>>>> > >
> > >>>>>>> > > We may also want to have the feature changes
> > (past
> > >>>>>>> and
> > >>>>>>> > future version
> > >>>>>>> > > numbers) available on that page but I think
> > those
> > >>>>>>> can be
> > >>>>>>> > plain text.
> > >>>>>>> > > These could be pulled directly from SVN as well.
> > >>>>>>> > >
> > >>>>>>> >
> > >>>>>>> >
> > >>>>>>> > I agree. I generally believe that documentation
> > >>>>>>> should be kept
> > >>>>>>> > in sync
> > >>>>>>> > with releases (and I also think that the effort
> > of
> > >>>>>>> doing so is
> > >>>>>>> > minimal).
> > >>>>>>> >
> > >>>>>>> >
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> --
> > >> Justin M Wozniak
> > >>
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Justin M Wozniak
> > _______________________________________________
> > Swift-devel mailing list
> > Swift-devel at ci.uchicago.edu
> > http://mail.ci.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/swift-devel
>
More information about the Swift-devel
mailing list