-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 429
Missing tags for 5.7.* #834
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
@AMDmi3 thank you for your comment... Re missing tags... you are sort of right... there has been no tags since the last release, 5.6.0, Nov 25, 2017... Actually, since github equates tags to releases, per our RELEASE.md docs, there can be no However, there have been some 104 commits to I need some help, or at least encouragement, feedback... to decide on release 5.8.0, or maybe 6.0.0, see #743, #741, etc... what issues should be included, moved on, etc... and do it... it's well overdue... thanks Use
|
Actually it doesn't. Tags are just tags unless you create a release. And you can mark GitHub release as 'pre-release' too. I do not suggest on pushing for a new stable release, I just note that each version ever mentioned in |
@AMDmi3 ok, experimentally added a Hope this improves things for you... to help update |
I found it strange that there only are 5.6.0 and 5.7.28 tags available at GitHub tags/releases. Given that 5.6.0 has issues with the (then) newly introduced |
I believe the versioning is broken. When the version.txt was incremented from 5.6.0 to 5.7.0 in f0438bd on next branch just immediately after tagging 5.6.0, and later tagging a 5.7.28 from the next branch, while still having an open 5.7 milestone, we notice that 5.7.28 actually should have been a 5.6.28. Having this 5.6.28 perfectly makes sense, since it basically counts the bug-fixes since the 5.6.0 release, while the next minor 5.7 still would be in future. Let me know if you need some help to get it sorted out. |
I'm going to release 5.8 in the near future (within a couple of weeks). We don't want to officially release odd versions, though, because we make no claims about ABI and API stability between minor versions. In fact, we often break ABI in order to keep our enums sorted, for example. I agree that we need improved release cadence for stable versions. I'll work on some infrastructure that makes that happen. In the meantime, I will close this. |
It was not the best idea to remove an existing tag (5.7.28) again as my workflows now fail, e.g., https://github.com/modelica/ModelicaStandardLibrary/pull/3784/checks?check_run_id=3164780076 |
Sorry. I was trying to clean up non-releases. Would there be any benefit in adding it back for you? We don't really want to tag non-release versions (anything with an odd minor version number), so I'm sorry it was added in the first place. But if you need it, then we shouldn't break something you already depend upon. |
I updated (and merged) my workflows to no longer depend on the deleted 5.7.28 tag. Thus, it is fine for me. Thanks. |
Sorry about that! I'm glad it's working out, at least. |
Repository is missing tags for 5.7.* versions, though
version.txt
is updated. This is crucial for packaging.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: