change release to 0.5 in .travis.yml

[tkelman]

these are equivalent right now, but once 0.6 comes out release will change
and this would no longer be testing against 0.5

[tkelman]

didn't really need to re-tag just for travis changes, should have mentioned that - it won't make a difference to what users get

[denizyuret]

OK, I was not really sure about the procedure. So each time we do a correction, I delete tags, git reset my METADATA and do a PkgDev.tag() and PkgDev.publish(). Is this generally the right procedure?

…

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 10:31 PM Tony Kelman ***@***.***> wrote: didn't really need to re-tag just for travis changes, should have mentioned that - it won't make a difference to what users get — You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#9 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABvNpiaZrhck5U20I-jRu47aijmufafhks5rfd6FgaJpZM4MKIDj> .

[tkelman]

sounds about right, yeah - also see https://github.com/attobot/attobot for a more recent option that allows you to do tagging entirely through the github web interface, if that sounds attractive to you

[denizyuret]

Hi Tony, If Knet-0.8.2 depends on AutoGrad-0.0.4 (so it has "AutoGrad 0.0.4" in its REQUIRE file), then I update AutoGrad to 0.0.5 and 0.0.6 and this final version breaks Knet-0.8.2, can I retroactively fix the requirement in Knet-0.8.2 to be "AutoGrad 0.0.4 0.0.5" in METADATA? Obviously when I first tagged Knet-0.8.2 that version of AutoGrad did not exist, so this should be a common problem, but I could not find a solution in docs or forums. best, deniz

…

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 11:03 PM Tony Kelman ***@***.***> wrote: sounds about right, yeah - also see https://github.com/attobot/attobot for a more recent option that allows you to do tagging entirely through the github web interface, if that sounds attractive to you — You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#9 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABvNpvQhFSnPesE05ii2q16pxWGFvOIjks5rfeYIgaJpZM4MKIDj> .

[tkelman]

Yes, you can retroactively propose adding upper bounds in-place to require files in metadata for existing tags. We should write the process down somewhere if it hasn't been. No need to touch the git tags or sha file contents, only the requires files should be modified.

[denizyuret]

So I redefine the 0.8.2 tag to point to the new commit that has the updated REQUIRE file and publish?

…

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 2:05 PM Tony Kelman ***@***.***> wrote: Yes, you can retroactively propose adding upper bounds in-place to require files in metadata for existing tags. We should write the process down somewhere if it hasn't been. No need to touch the git tags or sha file contents, only the requires files should be modified. — You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#9 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABvNpsCLAoDV-7I6NMWARDl1rmh6JBsuks5rxzvngaJpZM4MKIDj> .

[tkelman]

No. Just modify the METADATA/Knet/versions/0.8.2/requires file

[tkelman]

It would also be advisable to use minor, if not major, version numbers for breaking changes, and only use patch releases for bug fixes.