Skip to content

Bump develop when release branch created #832

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jul 19, 2016
Merged

Bump develop when release branch created #832

merged 9 commits into from
Jul 19, 2016

Conversation

JakeGinnivan
Copy link
Contributor

@JakeGinnivan JakeGinnivan force-pushed the BumpDevelopWhenReleaseBranchCreated branch from e95b565 to 22741e9 Compare April 17, 2016 06:37
gep13
gep13 reviewed Apr 17, 2016
View reviewed changes
src/GitVersionCore/EffectiveConfiguration.cs
}

public bool IsCurrentBranchDevelop { get; private set; }
public bool IsCurrentBranchRelease { get; private set; }
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@JakeGinnivan very small point, but can we get a space between the properties?

@gep13
Copy link
Member

gep13 commented Apr 17, 2016

@JakeGinnivan apart from one small comment, this looks good to me. 👍

@asbjornu
Copy link
Member

I think this looks good! Rebase, let Travis and AppVeyor do their thing and if all green; merge?

@DanielRose
Copy link
Contributor

When will this be merged? I could really use this.

@JakeGinnivan
Copy link
Contributor Author

JakeGinnivan commented Jun 2, 2016 •
edited
Loading

This is a bit of a change of behaviour. What does everyone think, changing defaults ok for a minor release? develop is going from unstable to alpha with this change

@asbjornu
Copy link
Member

asbjornu commented Jun 2, 2016

Since people can always configure develop to have the unstable tag, I think it's fine doing this in a minor. This configuration option should probably be mentioned in the release notes, though, so it's easily accessible information in case it causes trouble for anyone.

@JakeGinnivan
Copy link
Contributor Author

I need to see the impacts. It changes sorting and bumping rules. Changing back to unstable will cause more problems I think.

I think the sorting is the same, or better in most cases once this is merged. Spose we can release as a pre-release and gather feedback.

@JakeGinnivan JakeGinnivan force-pushed the BumpDevelopWhenReleaseBranchCreated branch from a87a41b to 786b3cf Compare July 10, 2016 04:24
This was referenced Jul 10, 2016
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
@JakeGinnivan JakeGinnivan force-pushed the BumpDevelopWhenReleaseBranchCreated branch from 4665a5f to be15618 Compare July 10, 2016 07:56
@JakeGinnivan JakeGinnivan mentioned this pull request Jul 16, 2016
Merged
@JakeGinnivan JakeGinnivan force-pushed the BumpDevelopWhenReleaseBranchCreated branch from be15618 to 3d7db4b Compare July 16, 2016 09:15
@JakeGinnivan JakeGinnivan force-pushed the BumpDevelopWhenReleaseBranchCreated branch from 3d7db4b to d193ec4 Compare July 17, 2016 03:24
@JakeGinnivan
Copy link
Contributor Author

@asbjornu have updated some of the images in the docs.

Will do the mainline docs update in that branch

@JakeGinnivan
Copy link
Contributor Author

This shows the real effect of this branch quite well.

image

@asbjornu
Copy link
Member

@JakeGinnivan That picture makes perfect sense. LGTM! 😄 👍

@JakeGinnivan JakeGinnivan merged commit e1f3576 into GitTools:master Jul 19, 2016
@JakeGinnivan JakeGinnivan deleted the BumpDevelopWhenReleaseBranchCreated branch July 19, 2016 14:42
@DanielRose
Copy link
Contributor

@JakeGinnivan One small thing I noticed: In docs/git-branching-strategies/img/39f9d8b8b007c82f1f80_major-release.png (also shown above), the effect of tagging the master branch is not shown anymore.

@JakeGinnivan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Nice catch @DanielRose, R#s test runner truncates output now and I didn't look properly :P

@JakeGinnivan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Have fixed that image in #950. Thanks @DanielRose

@DanielRose DanielRose mentioned this pull request Aug 9, 2016
Closed
asbjornu added a commit to asbjornu/GitVersion that referenced this pull request Mar 1, 2019
@asbjornu
Update the asserted version to match the changes introduced in GitToo…
294bdf3 
…ls#832
@sl-nigelalmada sl-nigelalmada mentioned this pull request Dec 13, 2019
Closed
@sheppyh sheppyh mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2023
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@JakeGinnivan @gep13 @asbjornu @DanielRose