[Swift-devel] Re: [Swift-commit] r4363 - branches

[Mihael Hategan]

On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 12:09 -0700, Sarah Kenny wrote:
> alrighty, so, does this seem right to everyone?

Almost. The instructions for checking out the source code are not quite
right.
> 
> http://www.ci.uchicago.edu/~skenny/swift/downloads/index.php
> 
> i'm doing a run thru of the site tester now building from
> tags/release-0.92.1 as a sanity test and assuming all goes well that's
> what i will use to build the binary.
> 
> let me know if this sounds ok or if i'm missing anything here. 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Mihael Hategan <hategan at mcs.anl.gov>
> wrote:
>         On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 11:33 -0700, Sarah Kenny wrote:
>         > and should the binary then still be called 0.92 rather than
>         0.92.1 ?
>         
>         
>         The binary would be called 0.92.1.
>         >
>         > being that 0.92 had such a substantial flaw and a warning
>         was posted
>         > on the site, it seems to me that we'd want to make it clear
>         (to users)
>         > that this is a new version/release by naming it
>         0.92.1...does tagging
>         > adequately solve this?
>         
>         
>         Tagging doesn't solve that. Tagging is there so that we can
>         have some
>         label in SVN that matches the packages that we release as
>         opposed to
>         having to track a specific revision in the branch.
>         >
>         
>         
>