Thanks for this feedback, Kathey. I expect that I will volunteer to
manage the 10.10 release later this year. When I do that, I will keep
your notes in mind and see what I can do to improve the instructions.
Some comments inline...
On 2/1/13 9:09 AM, Katherine Marsden wrote:
On 1/31/2013 10:19 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote:
Hi Lily,
I think you're talking about a 10.9.2 release. Can you let us know
which parts of the release instructions seem more complicated? I can
help improve the instructions if you let me know which parts are most
confusing.
I think in terms of the documentation (and the process) I noticed
several major themes in my failed attempts to put a release
together. I am sorry I did not take better notes in detail.
1) The process seems fragile on Windows.
DERBY-5461, DERBY-5463, DERBY-5460 and difficulty integrating an
md5sum tool combined with the chaining of steps together and problems
restarting if something fail due to the made my build something of a
patch work effort, but I did get it out by working around these
issues. On the publication, there is was trouble on windows due to
line endings. I don't really like the fact that it tried to svn commit
without letting me review my change.
Thanks for listing these bugs. I will try to take a look at them before
I generate 10.10.
2) It would be good to make the documentation more concise.
It is somewhat long, winding and repetitive. There is not a clear
numbering system for the steps and I found I would struggle through
with a step that was briefly mentioned only to find I should have done
it later and was given more detailed information. The interleaving
of instructions from old releases makes it confusing too. I think it
would be ok to just take this out prior to 10.9, but have to admit
sometimes having the old instructions was helpful in moving forward.
One approach I've started experimenting with is this: remove the
instructions for old releases and, instead, direct the user to an older
rev of the wiki page if old instructions are needed.
3)The process itself seems more complicated and extensive.
Maybe this is again just a function of one and two and the fact that
every time I got an afternoon to look at it, I would collide with
something else, but the process itself seems to have become more
complicated and extensive. (was it 22 pages vs 4 or 5 when I did a
10.5 release?)
This one might be cleared up by removing the old instructions as
described above. Without the old instructions, we can judge better
whether the improvements over the last few years have really simplified
the process or just moved the complexity around.
Thanks,
-Rick
I would say at least stay away from Windows if trying to make a
release, but I don't think that is an option for Lily.
Best
Kathey
Thanks,
-Rick
On 1/31/13 9:51 AM, Lily Wei wrote:
Hi:
The release process and procedure had definitely turns out to be
more involved than I participated. Compare to the previous release I
did, I have to say I am having problem just follow the instruction.
Derby is a wonderful product and technology to be more involved.
Therefore, I am seeking help from Derby developers. If I can do the
build for 10.9.1.0, can someone else help me with publishing and
rest of the tasks? For a minimum, we definitely should have clear
instruction for more Derby developers to follow. Hopefully, easy to
follow steps and procedure can proceed most of the time.
Any suggestion is welcome.
Thank you so much,
Lily
