v1.3.1 tag is not present in any branch

[Anup Patel]

On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 9:24 AM Jessica Clarke <jrtc27 at jrtc27.com> wrote:
>
> On 24 Jul 2023, at 04:47, Anup Patel <anup at brainfault.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 6:38 AM Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant at debian.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> As seen on IRC and github issues:
> >>
> >>  https://github.com/riscv-software-src/opensbi/issues/316
> >>
> >> There does not appear to be a branch that contains v1.3.1, which makes
> >> it rather complicated to actually fetch the tag.
> >>
> >>  https://github.com/riscv-software-src/opensbi/tree/v1.3.1
> >>
> >>  This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
> >>
> >> Please push a 1.3.x branch or some such with the tag!
> >
> > I had pushed release-1.3.1 branch two days back since few
> > folks (including yourself) reported this issue.
>
> What happens if there’s then a 1.3.2?

If the commit history of 1.3.2 differs from the master branch then
we will have to create release-1.3.2 branch for 1.3.2 as well.

>
> 1.3.1 is overly narrow. Good for tags but not branches.
> Something like 1.3.x as suggested is more forward-thinking.

I agree and that's why I had only created a tag but it seems
not everyone prefers git fetch to get latest tags.

Regards,
Anup

>
> Jess
>
> > This is the first time that we did an intermediate release so
> > going forward I will ensure that a separate branch in pushed
> > for an intermediate releases whenever intermediate release
> > has a different commit history compared to master branch.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Anup
> >
> >
> >>
> >> live well,
> >>  vagrant
> >> --
> >> opensbi mailing list
> >> opensbi at lists.infradead.org
> >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/opensbi
> >
> > --
> > opensbi mailing list
> > opensbi at lists.infradead.org
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/opensbi
>