Skip to content
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.

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

Precedence of tag and branch names when deducing version #1348

Closed
pi3k14 opened this issue Dec 15, 2017 · 8 comments
Closed

Precedence of tag and branch names when deducing version #1348

pi3k14 opened this issue Dec 15, 2017 · 8 comments

Comments

@pi3k14
Copy link
Contributor

pi3k14 commented Dec 15, 2017

I think you should tune the rules for calculating version numbers a bit.

When a commit is a tip of branch and contains a tag, the tag should only have precedence if it equals the version number of the branch and contains som extra metadata (eg. 1.0.0-rc.3), or if the branch doesn't contain any version number.

Eg. develop branch is just updated and tagged with an alpha/beta number, then there is forked a release branch with a given version number. An initial build from the release branch will create a version number from the tag, since the commit are the same.

I can't se any use case where current functionality makes sense.

@asbjornu
Copy link
Member

If you could provide this as a (failing) RepositoryFixture test in a pull request, it would be much easier to understand what behavior you want as well as fix it. If you're able to fix your issue in the same pull request, it would be even better. 😄

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jun 29, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. After 30 days from now, it will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@pi3k14
Copy link
Contributor Author

pi3k14 commented Aug 12, 2019

@asbjornu could you have a look at this (to re-open the issue)?

@asbjornu
Copy link
Member

@pi3k14, if you could follow up #1348 (comment), we can perhaps move this forward. In its current state, there's not much I can do, sorry.

@asbjornu asbjornu reopened this Aug 13, 2019
@stale stale bot removed the stale label Aug 13, 2019
@pi3k14
Copy link
Contributor Author

pi3k14 commented Aug 14, 2019

@asbjornu not quit sure I follow you on

if you could follow up #1348 (comment)

#1743 is my first attempt to describe the issue as a test case.

@asbjornu
Copy link
Member

Sorry, @pi3k14. I did not notice the existence of #1743 until you pointed it out now. The test looks good. If you have ideas on how to fix it, feel free to expand the PR.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Nov 14, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. After 30 days from now, it will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the stale label Nov 14, 2019
@arturcic arturcic removed the stale label Dec 13, 2019
@arturcic
Copy link
Member

Closed by #1743

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants