Tags for promoted builds

[Xiomara Jayasena]

Yuri Nesterenko wrote:
> By the way, how about tagging, say, moment of a certain PIT build?
>   
A few of us (Mark R., kto, etc.) discussed this and decided to only have 
tags for promoted builds -- to reduce the number of tags.
> Returning to this point may be necessary in situations with performance
> bugs (for instance). 
>   
Yes, that would be helpful.  Is how this is  handle now not sufficient?

Thanks,
-Xiomara
> Thanks,
> -Yuri
>
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 09:51:28AM -0800, Xiomara.Jayasena at Sun.COM wrote:
>   
>> What you see below was just for practice.  I had some discussions around 
>> this in RE and with Kelly and the conclusion was that it would be 
>> jdk7-bNN as you are suggesting.  I will also tag specific milestones as 
>> mentioned below.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Xiomara
>>
>>
>> Mark Reinhold wrote:
>>
>>     
>>>> Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 04:27:39 +0000
>>>> From: xiomara.jayasena at sun.com
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Changeset: 2e4d6d562de7
>>>> Author:    xdono
>>>> Date:      2007-11-09 20:03 -0800
>>>> URL:       http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/rev/2e4d6d562de7
>>>>
>>>> Added tag jdk7-ea-b99 for changeset 8792e7dbf130
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> The problem with this tag format, which is based on our ancient
>>> bundle-naming scheme, is that the middle token changes over time,
>>>       
>> >from "ea" to "beta" to (maybe) "beta2" to "rc" to "fcs".  This
>>     
>>> makes it unnecessarily difficult to look up a changeset for a
>>> specific build -- you also need to know in which phase of the
>>> release cycle it was promoted.
>>>
>>> I think it'd make more sense to use simple "jdk7-bNN" tags, and
>>> then also tag specific milestones as "jdk7-beta", "jdk7-rc1",
>>> "jdk7-fcs", etc.
>>>
>>> - Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>