If our release process is taking longer then 6 weeks, we should probably start the next release since we expect that it will take a long time as well even though the prior one is not yet finished. This will help get to an average of one release every 6 weeks.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 1:52 PM Chamikara Jayalath <[email protected]> wrote: > I think the idea was to include a 6 weeks worth of change diff in > subsequent releases. So cutting the 2.6.0 release branch 6 weeks from the > date 2.5.0 branch was cut sounds proper to me. I think we should > consistently cut release branches every six weeks even though some of the > releases might take longer than expected (hopefully not six weeks :)). > > - Cham > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 12:54 PM Andrew Pilloud <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> If I recall from the 2.4 discussion, the 2.5 branch should have been cut >> in late April. It was cut ~5 weeks late. Keeping to the 6 week release >> cadence, we are already late cutting the 2.6 release branch, which should >> be cut immediately. Then 2.7 should be cut in mid July. >> >> Andrew >> >> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 12:32 PM Kenneth Knowles <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Specifically, I mean that since we cut release-2.5.0 branch on Jun 6 we >>> would cut release-2.6.0 on July 18. >>> >>> This time around, we should cut first, cherry-pick second. >>> >>> Kenn >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 12:21 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> It makes sense. >>>> >>>> So, I will start the 2.6.0 process on July 17. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> JB >>>> >>>> On 25/06/2018 20:47, Alan Myrvold wrote: >>>> > It would be a more predictable cadence to have a consistent timing >>>> > between when the release branches are cut, and not when the release is >>>> > published. >>>> > >>>> > If 2.5.0 was cut on June 5, then 2.6.0 could be cut July 17? >>>> > >>>> > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 10:57 AM Ahmet Altay <[email protected] >>>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 10:49 AM, Ahmet Altay <[email protected] >>>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > JB, thank you for making this release happen. >>>> > >>>> > I noticed that python artifacts are not deployed to pypi yet. >>>> > Would you like me to do that? >>>> > >>>> > Thank you, >>>> > Ahmet >>>> > >>>> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 6:45 AM, Rafael Fernandez >>>> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Great news! Thanks so much to our Release Manager and >>>> > everybody who helped iron out the wrinkles! >>>> > >>>> > If you haven't seen it already, look for the thread >>>> > "[PROPOSAL] Add a blog post for Beam release 2.5.0 >>>> > " [1] >>>> > in dev@ - Alexey Romanenko has put together a very nice >>>> > summary of all the good stuff in 2.5.0. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > [1] >>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ae3284ca051b800b3edd73ad0f7f62344e26d3957b46794149bf1fb2@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>> >>>> > >>>> > " >>>> > >>>> > On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 8:33 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > I meant August (not July) for next release cycle. >>>> > >>>> > Regards >>>> > JB >>>> > >>>> > On 23/06/2018 05:17, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>>> > > Hi all, >>>> > > >>>> > > I'm happy to announce that we have unanimously >>>> > approved this release. >>>> > > >>>> > > There are 12 approving votes, 5 of which are >>>> binding: >>>> > > * Ahmet Altay >>>> > > * Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>> > > * Lukasz Cwik >>>> > > * Reuven Lax >>>> > > * Robert Bradshaw >>>> > > >>>> > > There are no disapproving votes. >>>> > > >>>> > > I'm finalizing the release. >>>> > > >>>> > > Thanks everyone! >>>> > > >>>> > > The 2.6.0 release process is expected to begin in 6 >>>> > weeks. So we should >>>> > > start the Jira triage on Saturday, 4th July and I >>>> > would like to start >>>> > > the release process on Tuesday 7th. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > My understanding was that there will be a release every 6 weeks. >>>> It >>>> > seems like with this plan (to start release process on August 7), >>>> > the understanding is that we will have 6 weeks between a release >>>> is >>>> > out and the start of the next release process. My take is, we need >>>> > to have a user centric view and a make promise to release every X >>>> > weeks. If X=6 is not sustainable we can discuss. However, having X >>>> > weeks in between a release cut and release start will result in >>>> > unpredictable release dates. >>>> > >>>> > What do you think? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > > >>>> > > Regards >>>> > > JB >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > On 17/06/2018 07:18, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>>> > >> Hi everyone, >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 >>>> > for the version >>>> > >> 2.5.0, as follows: >>>> > >> >>>> > >> [ ] +1, Approve the release >>>> > >> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide >>>> > specific comments) >>>> > >> >>>> > >> NB: this is the first release using Gradle, so >>>> don't >>>> > be too harsh ;) A >>>> > >> PR about the release guide will follow thanks to >>>> this >>>> > release. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> The complete staging area is available for your >>>> > review, which includes: >>>> > >> * JIRA release notes [1], >>>> > >> * the official Apache source release to be deployed >>>> > to dist.apache.org <http://dist.apache.org> >>>> > >> [2], which is signed with the key with fingerprint >>>> > C8282E76 [3], >>>> > >> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central >>>> > Repository [4], >>>> > >> * source code tag "v2.5.0-RC2" [5], >>>> > >> * website pull request listing the release and >>>> > publishing the API >>>> > >> reference manual [6]. >>>> > >> * Java artifacts were built with Gradle 4.7 >>>> (wrapper) >>>> > and OpenJDK/Oracle >>>> > >> JDK 1.8.0_172 (Oracle Corporation 25.172-b11). >>>> > >> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the >>>> source >>>> > release to the >>>> > >> dist.apache.org <http://dist.apache.org> [2]. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is >>>> > adopted by majority >>>> > >> approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Thanks, >>>> > >> JB >>>> > >> >>>> > >> [1] >>>> > >> >>>> > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12342847 >>>> > >> [2] >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.5.0/ >>>> > >> [3] >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS >>>> > >> [4] >>>> > >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1043/ >>>> > >> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.5.0-RC2 >>>> > >> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/463 >>>> > >> >>>> > > >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> > http://blog.nanthrax.net >>>> > Talend - http://www.talend.com >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>>> >>>
