[Gt-eos] ready to tag

[Mattias Ellert]

I have created PR with the 6.0 → 6.2 changes.

	Mattias

mån 2018-11-05 klockan 10:19 +0100 skrev Mischa Salle:
> Hi all,
> 
> I think 6.2 is fine.
> 
>     Mischa
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 02:31:48PM +0000, End of Support of Globus Toolkit wrote:
> > Mattias,
> > 
> > Thanks for pinging this thread. I vote 6.2.
> > 
> > - Brian
> > 
> > On 11/2/18 8:07 AM, Frank Scheiner via Gt-eos wrote:
> > Hi Mattias, all,
> > 
> > On 11/2/18 12:50, Mattias Ellert via Gt-eos wrote:
> > Hi!
> > 
> > Can we come to some kind of decision? I would like to package the
> > changes made to the sources since the last tag, and the way it is set
> > up now source tarballs are not created unless there is a tag. If it
> > drags out for a long time I could make package updates using patches,
> > but I think we can avoid that.
> > 
> > Regarding the toolkit version number: It should be 6.something -
> > otherwise the https://repo.gridcf.org/gct6/sources/ address no longer
> > makes sense and we would have to do quite a lot of changes.
> > 
> > The number 6.0 appears in a few places in the packaging files, so if we
> > stick to that no changes are needed. If we choose 6.1 or 6.2, a few
> > changes are needed, but it would be manageable (those changes should be
> > done before tagging though).
> > 
> > I'm ok with both 6.0 and 6.2. But my preference would be 6.2 actually, although we could still postpone 6.2 until after end of 2018 and stay with 6.0 for now.
> > 
> > So your decision.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Frank
> > 
> > 
> >     Mattias
> > 
> > mån 2018-10-22 klockan 10:12 -0500 skrev Mátyás Selmeci via Gt-eos:
> > Hi Mischa and folks,
> > 
> > I _really_ do not want to go backwards in versions.  I'm sure people
> > have scripts that check for $GLOBUS_VERSION and do one thing if it's
> > = 6.0 and another if it's < 6.0.  I don't want to mess up those scripts.
> > 
> > We don't have to worry about conflicting with a Globus 6.1 or 6.2
> > release because:
> > 
> > 1. We've been updating our repo to keep up with their repo.  If they
> > make a 6.2, then our 6.2 will incorporate their changes.
> > 
> > 2. They've been on 6.0 since _2014_.  They haven't bumped the version
> > even when they added features.  Now they're in bugfix-only mode so
> > they won't be adding features either.
> > 
> > 3. We can ask the Globus developers if they're OK with us calling our
> > version 6.2.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > -Mat
> > 
> > 
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > From: Mischa Salle
> > Sent: Sun, Oct 21, 2018 4:04 AM CDT
> > Subject: [Gt-eos] ready to tag
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > We have a few options each with pros and cons:
> > - 6.1 is logical, but used to indicate development version (see
> >    http://toolkit.globus.org/toolkit/downloads/
> >    We don't have to keep to that schema (Linux kernel also dropped it),
> >    but it could be confusing.
> > - 6.2 is then more logical, but both still have the problem that there
> >    is indeed a small chance that Globus will still release something, a
> >    final release or so (although I very much doubt that). OTOH, we're
> >    called gct, not globus_toolkit, so I personally think 6.something
> >    should be fine.
> > - 1.0 has none of the above problems, we can also decide then to
> >    continue with 1.1 as the next stable (minor)release. Problem is that
> >    we have already a gct-6.0.1536386276 as a prerelease.
> > Ideally I think Globus shouldn't have been using 6.0.XXXX as a
> > prerelease but something like 6.0.0-XXXX, which works better with a sort
> > and is consistent with typical debian and rpm numbering.
> > 
> > I think I personally would prefer to move to a gct-1.0.0 combined from
> > now on with 1.0.0-$(date +%s) for the development releases.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Mischa
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 06:13:16PM +0200, End of Support of Globus
> > Toolkit wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Now that Mattias has made EPEL and Debian packages from the current
> > builds, I think we're finally ready to tag a release. Does anybody have
> > an objection to the version 6.0.1? I'd like to keep the "6.0" for now to
> > emphasize that we're still compatible with that version of the Globus
> > Toolkit.
> > 
> > Will there be a Globus 6.1 or 7.0 at some point, that some of our customers
> > could be exposed to?  If so, it would lead to confusion sooner or later.
> > 
> > Should we better start our releases with 1.0.0 instead and mention desired
> > compatibility details in the release notes?
> > 
> > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 11:34:27AM -0500, End of Support of Globus
> > Toolkit wrote:
> > Sorry, looks like we might not be able to use 6.0.1 because the "micro"
> > version number is actually the timestamp of the latest commit, which
> > gets added to the version of the "gct" tarball.
> > 
> > The version "6.0" gets embedded in several places in the code, most
> > notably as the GLOBUS_VERSION environment variable and the script
> > "/usr/bin/globus-version", so we'll have to try out 6.1 first to make
> > sure it doesn't cause any problems.
> > 
> > -Mat
> > 
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > From: Mátyás Selmeci
> > Sent: Fri, Oct 19, 2018 10:53 AM CDT
> > Subject: ready to tag
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Now that Mattias has made EPEL and Debian packages from the current
> > builds, I think we're finally ready to tag a release. Does anybody have
> > an objection to the version 6.0.1? I'd like to keep the "6.0" for now to
> > emphasize that we're still compatible with that version of the Globus
> > Toolkit.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > -Mat
> > 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5032 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.egi.eu/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20181105/cbb887a4/attachment.p7s>