Thanks again Danny for managing what proved to be a very complicated
release! A few of my thoughts below:

- Yes, we should try to write good commit messages to remove the
burden from the release manager
- Personally I think we should use tags for releases consistent with
what we have used in the past. I assume we can configure Gradle's
release plugin to do so.
- I personally would like to have the test sources still published
since I use them in my Calcite notebooks project
(https://github.com/michaelmior/calcite-notebooks)
--
Michael Mior
[email protected]

Le ven. 6 mars 2020 à 09:54, Danny Chan <[email protected]> a écrit :
>
> About how/when the code is suitable for a release
>
> 1.22.0 is a huge release and we have many bug-fixes and improvements, but 
> also we changed a lot of code:
>
>
> • The RexNode normalization and project names remove from digest did change a 
> lot of plan from the Apache Flink side
> • Personally I fixed about 10+ bugs when I do a pre-validation for Apache 
> Flink 1.11.0-SNAPSHOT locally
>
> I believe the Calcite code is always in good quality and shape, but these 
> bugs still there, we need to find a way to reduce these bugs.
>
> Some fellows suggest to introduce a daily tests for other downstream 
> projects, maybe a good idea ~
>
> About the release tag format
> The release tag now changes from pattern calcite-x.y.z to rel/vx.y.z, which 
> is done automatically by the release plugin of current Gradle, we should make 
> a decision which pattern we should use ~
>
> About the release note
> Some fellows think that some of the commit messages are not that 
> readable/understandable, I have some thoughts here ~
>
>
> • It’s not easy to keep every commit message readable for the release 
> manager, we better do this when we merge the   code
> • We may need some part in the future to show the known issues/bugs which is 
> introduced in current release
> • Do we need to put the credit (commit name) after each commit message ? It 
> seems many projects put the credits in the last part together of the release 
> note
>
>
> About the release plugin
>
> I found some problems of the current release plugin work-flow(personal 
> feeling):
>
> • The RC artifacts was removed when I do the release, which actually I think 
> should not do, one awkward thing is that my network sucks, I failed in the 
> last step, so the RC artifacts removed but the release failed ~
> • The java doc doesn’t distinguish main API and test API, they are just 
> together [1] ~
> • The calcite-core does not publish the test sources now, should we add it 
> back ?
>
> [1] https://calcite.apache.org/javadocAggregate/
>
> Best,
> Danny Chan

Reply via email to