DiegoLont wrote
Just to be sure I understand our goal properly: We want to create a stable version with versioner at the end of the week. A stable version is a version that only gets approved changes (where we can have discussion about when a change gets approved for moose …).
If we want a snapshot (no bug fixes allowed, 100% reproducible), we should not pollute the configuration with it. And then we need to have a complete list with all packages. That means: that we need a snapshot of Pharo too.
Yes, we should really take care that released (numbered versions with exact packages leading to reproducible loadings) are not snapshots. A release should correspond to something else that just the version of the week XX. A release should provides a list of changes / features accepted by the community, thus forming a coherent set of packages. I'm also against a bloated configuration with released versions corresponding to nothing. The best is to be able to do a release easily, *only when needed*.
DiegoLont wrote
I am currently taking a look at versioner and trying to determine if this workflow would be acceptable. I tried it on Moose and and Glamour. And this is the problems I have:
- The comment on the release button says: create a new version and a new
baseline. Pressing the button does not create a new baseline (this is good), so please fix the comment here.
right, thanks. In a first time, at each time a structural change was made to the configuration, a new baseline was created. It is not true anymore. I will update the comment.
DiegoLont wrote
- Pressing the button suggests it resolves all symbolic dependencies to
actual versions. I want more control here. In Moose the correct version for Grease is currently #’release1.1’. For Magritte3 this should be #’release3.1’.
You can also set the specific version directly in the development version but, if I understand well, you would like to specify any version at the release time?
DiegoLont wrote
- Dialog is way too small: I cannot see the version number I am creating.
Spec problem. I don't know how to fix this pb.
DiegoLont wrote
- The suggested version number is incorrect. I.e. for moose it should be
5.0 or 5.0.0. For glamour it should be 2.9 or 2.9.0.
What was suggested? Versionner relies on the max version detected by Metacello for that.
DiegoLont wrote
- Looking at the version:
when you want to create a stable version, starting at a developmentversion, it should also "upgrade the references" to used projects to stable. Either by using the latest stable, or by creating a new stable version is the current version is newer. This means that each time it encounters a project that is “dirty” in the sense I described above, I get a dialog asking me if I want to create new version and what version number this should be.
It looks like it is the core feature missing for Moose peple: some kind of deep release. Here, I would like suggestions on how to do that. For such a big configuration, you may end with dozens of dialog boxes (for each projec) and a huge process.
DiegoLont wrote
> I do not get the possibility of adding a good description.
I should ask in the release panel. The description label displayed is not good to do that.
DiegoLont wrote
> In glamour I get 2 common blocks. - both common blocks define author, timestamp, blessing anddescription.
Strange, I should try to reproduce.
DiegoLont wrote
These problems should be fixed before we can do this. And of course, we should check for all projects if the result is the desired result.
Don't hesitate to open bugs/feature requests and/or contribute.
Regards, Christophe.
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Release-process-for-Moose-components-and-subcomponents... Sent from the Moose mailing list archive at Nabble.com.