Re: tag for 2.17.96 is missing in git

[Phil Holmes]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Werner LEMBERG" <address@hidden>
To: <address@hidden>
Cc: <address@hidden>; <address@hidden>
Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2013 3:53 PM
Subject: Re: tag for 2.17.96 is missing in git


> > > Hmm.  So why do we have
> > >
> > >  commit 9918cd9f8d8f5461c6ad7e086fd93de59960eb95
> > >  Author: Phil Holmes <address@hidden>
> > >  Date:   Sun Nov 24 22:05:16 2013 +0000
> > >
> > >      Release: bump VERSION.
> > >
> > > in the `master' branch?  This looks incorrect to me, given that we
> > > currently derive 2.17.9X tarballs from the `stable' branch, right?
> >
> > VERSION is out of step on master and stable, so needs bumping
> > separately on each.
>
> But I think we must not use 2.17.9X for the `master' branch!  Such
> tags should be only used on `stable'.  It's totally confusing if a
> developer reports a problem with, say, 2.17.97, and we have to ask `on
> stable or on master?'...
>
> IMHO, releases from `master' should use 2.19.XX.  Then we can add
> proper tags also so that e.g. `git describe' returns meaningful
> results.

This is the version of VERSION on master:

PACKAGE_NAME=LilyPond
MAJOR_VERSION=2
MINOR_VERSION=19
PATCH_LEVEL=0
MY_PATCH_LEVEL=
VERSION_STABLE=2.16.2
VERSION_DEVEL=2.17.96

This is the version on stable/2.18:

PACKAGE_NAME=LilyPond
MAJOR_VERSION=2
MINOR_VERSION=17
PATCH_LEVEL=97
MY_PATCH_LEVEL=
VERSION_STABLE=2.16.2
VERSION_DEVEL=2.17.96

So any builds made from master will be version 2.19.0 - the VERSION_DEVEL is 
only used for text entries on the website, I believe.  Builds from 
stable/2.18 will be version 2.17.97.  So I think it's right that the tag for 
2.17.96 is also in stable/2.18?

--
Phil Holmes