You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 20, 2023. It is now read-only.
Repository navigation
This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 20, 2023. It is now read-only.
But not so easy to guess what the number of the release will be. There are tools to find the previous stable or unstable release in git_trac/git_repository.py but I don't see any support for adding the release version to git_trac/releasemgr/cmdline.py One could do something with
parser_close.add_argument('--version', ...
and similarly for parser_merge if --close was given, but maybe this is more invasive than desired?
I also can't know the name of the next release for sure. It would have to be an extra step after the release. This could also replace branch names with commits etc...
I also can't know the name of the next release for sure.
? Do you mean that it could be 6.4.beta5 but then turn into 7.0.beta5 ? I'm not sure what you mean.
It would have to be an extra step after the release. This could also replace branch names with commits etc...
Again, I'm not sure why; it would only require naming a release in the fashion above. After all, when you close it it replaces branch names anyway, as far as I can tell. And it is annoying when that happens now, because one doesn't even know exactly where something closed appears until you send out the email to sage-release.
Alternately, would it be possible to have a separate parser option parser_merged_in or something just to do this thing?
On a related note, I was wondering what happens with dup/invalid tickets nowadays - presumably they don't appear at all in the git history, but it's important for them to be noted somewhere; I presume Jeroen's script still finds them, or maybe not?
Ah, I didn't scroll that far, since I was thinking of the closing process. Okay, that is a good place for me to start. Would something along the following lines work?
def release(self, version, check=True):
from .make_release import update_version, create_tarball, check_tarball, check_upgrade
...
for ticket in self.find_tickets_for_this_version(version):
self.trac.authenticated_proxy.ticket.update(ticket.number, '', {'Merged in': version}, True)
def find_tickets_for_this_version(version):
assert version == self.repo.current_version()
prev = self.repo.previous_version()
ticket_list = []
# now steal code from self.repo.find_release_merge_of_ticket,
# or probably write a new method, where the log only goes to
# the previous version prev
# and appends the ticket number to this list
and then in the repo, define the obvious previous_version not just previous_stable_version.
This wouldn't be the most efficient way to do it, but it seems like it would be robust.
Activity
vbraun commentedon Nov 17, 2014
Yes we only know for sure the name of the next release when we release.
kcrisman commentedon Nov 18, 2014
Would you be averse to stuff like
in the event I could figure out how to do it properly?
vbraun commentedon Nov 18, 2014
I also can't know the name of the next release for sure. It would have to be an extra step after the release. This could also replace branch names with commits etc...
kcrisman commentedon Nov 18, 2014
? Do you mean that it could be 6.4.beta5 but then turn into 7.0.beta5 ? I'm not sure what you mean.
Again, I'm not sure why; it would only require naming a release in the fashion above. After all, when you close it it replaces branch names anyway, as far as I can tell. And it is annoying when that happens now, because one doesn't even know exactly where something closed appears until you send out the email to sage-release.
Alternately, would it be possible to have a separate parser option
parser_merged_inor something just to do this thing?On a related note, I was wondering what happens with dup/invalid tickets nowadays - presumably they don't appear at all in the git history, but it's important for them to be noted somewhere; I presume Jeroen's script still finds them, or maybe not?
vbraun commentedon Nov 18, 2014
Im mean it could be 6.5.beta7 or 6.5.rc0, say.
The replacing of branch names is currently done in a trac plugin.
vbraun commentedon Nov 19, 2014
There is a "git releasemgr release x,y.z" subcommand to actually make the release, that would be the right place to do it.
kcrisman commentedon Nov 19, 2014
Ah, I didn't scroll that far, since I was thinking of the closing process. Okay, that is a good place for me to start. Would something along the following lines work?
and then in the repo, define the obvious
previous_versionnot justprevious_stable_version.This wouldn't be the most efficient way to do it, but it seems like it would be robust.