As we're starting to consider 1.5.2 and 1.6.1 coming out in the near
future, I want to revisit a discussion[1] I started at the end of April
regarding the "testing burden" that is currently set forth in our
release document[2].
What I'm proposing is to modify the language of the release document to
be explicit about the amount of testing needed. For bug-fix, "minor"
releases (e.g. 1.5.2 and 1.6.1), the 7 days of testing using continuous
ingest and randomwalk (with and without agitation) will be clearly
defined as "may" instead of "should" or "must" language. If the
resources are available, it is recommended that some longer,
multi-process/node test is run against the release candidate; however,
it is not required and should not prevent us from making the minor release.
I will also include language that strongly recommends that the changes
included in the "minor" release be vetted/reviewed as a way to mitigate
the risk of shipping new regressions.
I am not recommending that the language be changed for "major" releases
(e.g. 1.7.0 and 2.0.0) as these releases still imply significant new
features or internal changes.
Unless someone informs me otherwise, I will treat this as a normal
lazy-consensus approval. Assuming we move closer to "proper" semantic
versioning for 2.0.0, I believe these updated guidelines will change
again. I do however think there is merit in making this change now so
that we can get the good bugs that we've fixed out to our users.
Let me know what you think. I will wait, at least, the prescribed three
days before changing any thing.
- Josh
[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/accumulo-dev/201404.mbox/%3C535931A7.30605%40gmail.com%3E
[2] http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/releasing.html
