+- Cuberite Forum (https://forum.cuberite.org)
+-- Forum: Cuberite (https://forum.cuberite.org/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Discussion (https://forum.cuberite.org/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Giving MCServer a version number (/thread-1847.html)
RE: Giving MCServer a version number - worktycho - 05-09-2015
@worktycho Yep. So we need to have had a testing branch for a few weeks before creating stable.
RE: Giving MCServer a version number - bearbin - 05-09-2015
We probably also need tags for bugs - testing/stable/master?
RE: Giving MCServer a version number - sphinxc0re - 05-09-2015
And will we link only stable executables on the webpage then?
RE: Giving MCServer a version number - tigerw - 05-09-2015
So much bureaucracy...
RE: Giving MCServer a version number - bearbin - 05-09-2015
@sphinxcore
Probably.
RE: Giving MCServer a version number - LogicParrot - 05-09-2015
(05-09-2015, 12:07 AM)bearbin Wrote: Yep.
@worktycho can you confirm this flow as correct?
master -> testing -> stable
where master is updated all the time, and merged into testing every 2/3 weeks, bugs are fixed in testing then merged back into master, then after 2/3 weeks testing is promoted into stable.
The time period doesn't have to be constant. For example, Debian packages are promoted to the next branch when there are no bugs at all for (10?) days.
RE: Giving MCServer a version number - bearbin - 05-09-2015
I don't think MCServer is likely to be in a position of having 0 bugs anytime soon
RE: Giving MCServer a version number - tigerw - 05-09-2015
Who's going to test the testing branch?
RE: Giving MCServer a version number - bearbin - 05-09-2015
Just like the people who test the bukkit testing branch - normal server owners who want a more updated server.
Also, I created some builds for the testing branch, you can find them on the buildserver.
RE: Giving MCServer a version number - tigerw - 05-09-2015
Then why not have master as testing?