I have started the release process. I have finished up to the "Generate the Release Notes" section which still needs to be done. Basically we need to the docs or site to have a link to the generated html release notes from JIRA. I have also worked on the next section "Build and Deploy Artifacts" and the "Build the artifacts:" instructions are accurate now as well.
Next I need to edit the docs/index.html page to add a link to the generated site which is in the docs/site/ directory. I am pushing what I have completed and I will pick this up tomorrow. If anyone makes any edits to the instructions or any other changes, please post a summary here so that I know where we are in the morning. Thanks! Aaron On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 8:18 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: > Just to be clear, if you make updates. Please update master. Thanks! > > Aaron > > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I have started the 0.2 release, so no rush. If needed we can do a point >> release, or get to 0.3 sooner. >> >> Aaron >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Chris Rohr <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Do you want me to try to get the console finished before code freeze? >>> >>> On Sep 4, 2013, at 6:29 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > I have been reading through the release notes (I know that we will be >>> > making changes to them as needed). Should we branch for the release >>> > "0.2-dev" and tag "0.2.0" so that we know what was in the release? Or >>> > should we branch each time? So that "0.2.0" is a branch, and we branch >>> > from "0.2.0" to make "0.2.1"? >>> > >>> > On side a note, I think that unless there is a bug fix needed for >>> "0.2.0" >>> > that we should just work toward "0.3.0" and have that release within a >>> > month. What do you all think? >>> > >>> > Aaron >>> > >>> > >>> > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >> Awesome thanks Chris! And good luck! >>> >> >>> >> Aaron >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Chris Rohr <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> I just commented on the Blur Console ticket with the last remaining >>> items >>> >>> that don't work. I can try to fix them tonight (assuming my wife >>> doesn't >>> >>> go into labor). >>> >>> >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 4, 2013, at 6:55 AM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> That is good with me. I do have one request. Can I leave the factory >>> >>> code I put in to allow for the creation of the block cache? It's >>> pretty >>> >>> harmless code and has no effect on configuration. Once I remove the >>> v2 >>> >>> block cache I think we can consider a code freeze. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Aaron >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On Sep 3, 2013, at 11:14 PM, Tim Williams <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>>> I meant to add, I reckon this'd mean we'd pull back the block >>> cache-v2 >>> >>>>> stuff for this release... >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> On Tuesday, September 3, 2013, Tim Williams wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>>> I've been editing HowToRelease[1] in anticipation of an upcoming >>> >>>>>> release. I'd like to propose instead that we just do the release >>> and >>> >>>>>> edit that with the commands/procedures that we actually perform. >>> The >>> >>>>>> rationale is that some of preferred methods have changed (e.g. >>> >>>>>> svn-based vs. p.a.o/dist) and it'd be easiest for the RM to just >>> >>>>>> update it as they go along. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Are there any open issues blocking a release? >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Can we consider a code-freeze on master for a couple days? >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> If no to both, any problems with creating a release candidate >>> tomorrow >>> >>>>>> and letting it run 72hrs? >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Or, an alternate proposal? >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>> >>>>>> --tim >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> [1] - https://wiki.apache.org/blur/HowToRelease >>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >
