Release tagging

[CMCDragonkai]

Can there be a release tag for this library. I'm going to be using it in an redistributable library.

[CMCDragonkai]

Oh apparently branch aliasing works.

[simensen]

It will still be nicer for your users to have stable releases from this library. :) I'll try to see if I can tag in the next week or two.

Curious, what project are you working on?

[CMCDragonkai]

I'm working on PolyAuth. A framework agnostic authentication and authorisation library. That would be great if you can support a tag. https://github.com/Polycademy/PolyAuth

[CMCDragonkai]

Does a 1.0.x-dev work for redistributable libraries?

[simensen]

@CMCDragonkai You would be able to do 1.0.*@dev or something along those lines, but people would need to whitelist dflydev/hawk as well, something like this:

{
    "require": {
        "polycademy/polyauth": "1.0.*",

        "dflydev/hawk": "@dev"
    }
}

So it would be better to have some stable releases so they can just require your library:

{
    "require": {
        "polycademy/polyauth": "1.0.*"
    }
}

[CMCDragonkai]

Cool. When can I expect a release tag? I'm already using it.

[CMCDragonkai]

Hey @simensen any news on the release tagging?

[simensen]

@CMCDragonkai I really want to tag. I'm struggling because I'm not sure I'm ready for 1.0.*, though. It is going to happen. I just need to decide if I should tag 0.0.0 or if i should take 1.0.0.

@davedevelopment suggested the 0.0.* path. I'd have to go back and update some of my other projects to be working on 0.* instead of 1.*.

In the future I need to remember to create 0.0.x-dev instead of 1.0.x-dev branch aliases until the API stabilizes. :)

Thanks for your patience. I'll try to do this by the end of the week, one way or the other.

If I went the path of creating 0.0.0, would you feel comfortable updating your code to require 0.0.* instead of 1.0.*?

[CMCDragonkai]

Yep that's what I was expecting 0.0* if it wasn't ready for 1.0.

[simensen]

Alright, 0.0.0 is tagged. :) Hopefully this won't last long and we can tag 1.0.* in the near future. As more people work with it we'll get a better idea if the API makes sense.

[CMCDragonkai]

Thanks but I think the 0.0.x-dev is conflicting with the v0.0.0 tag. When I put in 0.0.0 it downloads the dev version not the release tagged version. Might be a bit confusing. But... I might be wrong about that, since the reference seems the same.

[simensen]

Are you requiring @dev or do you have minimum stability set to dev? If so you'll end up getting 0.0.x-dev.

I'll double check later on my own when I'm on my laptop.

[simensen]

@CMCDragonkai Is this all good or are you still having issues?

[CMCDragonkai]

Should be good now. Thanks.

On 27/11/2013 1:13 AM, Beau Simensen wrote:

@CMCDragonkai https://github.com/CMCDragonkai Is this all good or
are you still having issues?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5 (comment).

[rayward]

@simensen could you provide a new tag for this repo please?

This repo hasn't had any dev since 2015, and we've been using it for quite a long time so it should be considered stable?