Thread: pgsql: Tag 9.1rc1.
Tag 9.1rc1. Branch ------ REL9_1_STABLE Details ------- http://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/d89b8daf5ee05f9c6fa63695e88d2315a224bf2d Modified Files -------------- configure | 18 +++++++++--------- configure.in | 2 +- doc/bug.template | 2 +- src/include/pg_config.h.win32 | 6 +++--- 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
We seem to have been fairly inconsistent in whether we call this operation "tag" or "stamp", if we look at it historically. With a little turn towards "tag" lately. May I humbly suggest that we actually start calling it "stamp" instead, to make it very clear that this is a different operation from the "git tag" operation that's done on the tree a bit later? Reasonable? //Magnus On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 23:24, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Tag 9.1rc1. > > Branch > ------ > REL9_1_STABLE > > Details > ------- > http://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/d89b8daf5ee05f9c6fa63695e88d2315a224bf2d > > Modified Files > -------------- > configure | 18 +++++++++--------- > configure.in | 2 +- > doc/bug.template | 2 +- > src/include/pg_config.h.win32 | 6 +++--- > 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list (pgsql-committers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers >
On 19 August 2011 15:15, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > May I humbly suggest that we actually start calling it "stamp" > instead, to make it very clear that this is a different operation from > the "git tag" operation that's done on the tree a bit later? > Reasonable? +1 I agree that the ambiguity is pretty confusing, and unnecessarily so. -- Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> May I humbly suggest that we actually start calling it "stamp"
> instead, to make it very clear that this is a different operation from
> the "git tag" operation that's done on the tree a bit later?
In the CVS workflow there was no reason to draw a distinction, since we
applied the tag at the same time as committing the textual changes.
But I see the point of avoiding the word "tag" now. I'll change my
private procedural notes to recommend "stamp", but don't guarantee that
I'll remember the first few times ...
regards, tom lane