On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Now'also a good time to consider tagging efforts. I used to tag > compat-drivers releases to match the same next tag from linux-next as > we moved on with the only difference I used compat-drivers-2013-05-07 > dates instead of next-20130507 and I also added a -1 or -2 if I > bumped updates by sticking to the same linux-next target. > > Whatever we decide I'll just note that rel-html currently supports the > scheme of dates that are split. I'll still have to update rel-html to > support the project name change so perhaps its good for us to consider > the tag use / practice. To be clear I only added a signed tag if and > only if ckmake yielded good results on all supported kernels. Using > git describe you'd be able to easily get the target next release tag. > > Thoughts, preferences? Here's an example: linux-next based releases: * backports-20130408 -- first release based on next-20130408 * backports-20130408-2 -- update on the backports code still based on next-20130408 * etc linux-stable releases: * backports-v3.10 - based on vanilla Linus-blessed v3.10 * backports-v3.10-2 - update on the backports code still based on vanilla v3.10 * backports-v3.10.1 - based on vanila Greg-bless v3.10.1 * backports-v3.10.1-2 - update on the backports code still based on vanilla v3.10.1 Thoughts? I should note I tried to stick to v3.10-1 convention for the first release but it just totally slipped at times. Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe backports" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
