I'm not aware of any strict rule that a release manager must be a committer. However, the activities of a product release almost always involve things like tagging the source repository, so in practice, I've always seen that the release manager is a committer on the project.
Chris Nauroth On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Alex Van Boxel <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for clarifying (I'm new to this Apache releasing ;-) > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 6:58 PM Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > This would be for changes AFTER release / rc. Ie. an RC is basically what > > we as a community deem stable and under normal circumstances is the equal > > to the release. A release is done by a release manager (per Apache > > guidelines) so it makes sense that a release manager can only apply > patches > > to a release. For this release I am the release manager. > > > > Alpha and beta versions are open to any committer. > > > > That's the idea which to me makes sense, but maybe an other option is > > better? > > > > Bolke > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > On 8 Jan 2017, at 18:27, Alex Van Boxel <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > This looks good, except do we need a release manager that applies > > patches? > > > > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017, 14:36 Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi All, > > >> > > >> As part of the release process I have created "Airflow Release > Planning > > >> and Supported Release Lifetime” ( > > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/ > Airflow+Release+Planning+and+Supported+Release+Lifetime > > >> < > > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/ > Airflow+Release+Planning+and+Supported+Release+Lifetime > > >). > > >> I borrowed heavily from Samba’s Release Planning for this, so any > > >> resemblance is not coincidental :-). > > >> > > >> Please take a look and make suggestions as not all may fit our rhythm. > > >> Main take aways: > > >> > > >> * We aim to do a major release every 6 months (ie. 1.8 -> 1.9) > > >> * Minor releases (1.8.0 -> 1.8.1) can happen whenever needed. > > >> * We only support (“maintenance mode”) N-1. So if 1.9.0 is released, > > 1.8.X > > >> enters maintenance. 1.7.X is EOL’d. > > >> * Patches to closed branches (ie. RC+) need to have a signoff from > > another > > >> committer and support from the mailinglist (Can this be done in the > > Apache > > >> way?). A release manager then needs to apply te patch. > > >> > > >> Other: > > >> * Patches land on master first > > >> * Branches are maintained as “vX.Y-test” and “vX.Y-stable”. No minor > > >> branches. Thus when 1.8.0 is released, this will be the stable branch > > >> “v1.8-stable”, automatically “v1.8-test” becomes the to be 1.8.1 > > version. > > >> > > >> I hope this makes sense. Do we need to vote on this? > > >> > > >> Cheers > > >> Bolke > > >> > > >> > > > -- > _/ > _/ Alex Van Boxel >
