175 - Alpha packages named from git-describe, not from branch name

Example: 2.4.2.25-Beta-4-g922576d

To the average user, that's going to appear to be an alpha version of v2.4.2.25 fact, it is AFTER that tag, and would be considered an alpha of x.x.x.26. It would be much better to simply use the branch name: master-g922576d

It would probably be advisable to also keep a simple "master" alpha as well, that always points at the current head.

User	When	Change
Torhal	Wed, 09 Nov 2011 14:41:46	Changed status from New to Accepted
Torhal	Fri, 03 Jun 2011 16:58:40	Changed assigned to from None to prencher
Ackis	Tue, 05 May 2009 16:36:46	Changed component from None to Component #18

You must login to post a comment. Don't have an account? Register to get one!

3 comments

- Reply
- #3
Nevcairiel Mon, 28 Jul 2008 19:56:26
I agree with Dashkal, the naming is stupid. Don't use the last tag name at all in the alpha builds, imho.
- Reply
- #2
Dashkal Mon, 28 Jul 2008 19:53:28
I'd actually love to see that be configurable. Allow us to specify the template to use to generate the filename.
- Reply
- #1
ckknight Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:55:50
I quite prefer it the way it is now.