[Libguestfs] Proposal to start tagging releases in git with v<VERSION>

[Richard W.M. Jones]

On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 02:17:00PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote:
> On Tuesday 03 May 2016 21:27:47 Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > 
> > For historical reasons that don't really matter now, we currently
> > tag all releases with just the version number, eg:
> > 
> >   commit 6b48977cb7100e4f214b189052d4f0bf61523d11 (HEAD -> master, tag: 1.33.26, origin/master, origin/HEAD)
> >   Author: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones at redhat.com>
> >   Date:   Tue May 3 14:49:59 2016 +0100
> > 
> >       Version 1.33.26.
> > 
> > Of course this isn't the way that git versions are normally tagged.
> > The normal convention is to use "v<VERSION>" (eg. "v1.33.26").
> > 
> > I propose that I start tagging new releases this way (see the patch
> > below).  This shouldn't be controversial.
> > 
> > The question is should I tag new releases with the "old style" tags?
> > I'd prefer not to.  Should I go back and add "v<VERSION>" tags to all
> > the old releases?  Again, I'd prefer not to, but could do that if
> > anyone thinks it's necessary.
> 
> I've seen both ways used IMHO equally, so I don't have a strong
> preference.
> 
> Just wondering whether the right moment for changing tag naming would
> be when tagging the .0 of a new series.

Perhaps, but I'd say an argument against doing it for a .0 release
would be that it lets us test that our CI & build tools work now
during the development phase.  (Unless you mean .0 of the next
development release, which punts the whole thing far into the future.)

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines.  Tiny program with many
powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc.
http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top