I would add that we could follow more or less the process described in
http://cocoon.apache.org/devinfo/releasing.html
This seems to be pretty reasonable. Tagging the trunk is not really
complicated.
wdyt ?
Emmanuel Lecharny a écrit :
David Jencks a écrit :
I think we should release 1.5 "now" but in all the other projects
I'm involved with a vote happens after the code is tagged and the
actual artifacts that are proposed for release are built, staged,
and ready for examination by the voters. That way you know exactly
what the code you are voting on is (its been tagged) and you can
look at the artifacts and check for proper legal files (something
that always seems to get messed up between thinking you're ready for
a release and actually building the artifacts).
Basically, due to the small number of committers, we just rely on the
number of JIRA issues to say ! "let's release" now. Of course, this is
faked because when we feel like it's time to release, we usually
postpone some issues. It would be much better to have strict roadmaps,
to stick to them, and to [VOTE] only when we have frozen/tagged the
release. If the [VOTE] is 'no', then we unfrost the project, clean the
last issues, and [VOTE] again.
What is the usual apacheds process? Is this a opinion poll on
whether to tag, build, stage, and vote or the actual release vote?
If the latter, how do you know what you're voting on?
We are lucky to be able to use a shorter cycle right now, but I can
feel in my bones that it won't last forever... The more users we will
have, the more 'rigid' we will have to be. Let say that for 1.5.0,
which is an intermediate release, we want to release fast, because we
will add new features soon (1.5.1 and 1.5.2). As you can see, we
didn't had any RC, when we have had 4 RC for 1.0. You can bet that 2.0
will be much more strict regarding release process.
It's not perfect... but we can work on a better process.
thanks
david jencks
Emmanuel
