Vadim Gritsenko wrote: > Leo Simons wrote: > >> On 24-08-2005 01:27, "Vadim Gritsenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> is no reason to do yet another RC build just because of it :-) because >>> it is simple addition which does not alter any existing behavior. >> >> -1 on such a process. There should be *no* difference between the RC >> that is voted on and what is eventually released. Take this seriously! > > <vent> > Give me a break!
Sorry Vadim, but no. You should be giving the release manager a break and not put pressure on him to keep including changes into a release near the end of a several-week release process. Its bad form and wastes everyone's time. The problem you brought up has existed for years and there have been many years to fix it. I understand it is a new problem for you and you're burning to fix it now, but in collaborative development there's many needs to take into consideration besides your own. There will be many more years to fix this stuff after Shash finishes the release cycle. If you want a release that includes your fix you can volunteer to build it and put on the release manager hat. That would be very healthy for this community. Having releases once every so often (with often << year) is good. We're not going to get to such a point if every release cycle takes rediculously long. > PMC can release whatever it wants as long as what is > had released matches with what it had voted upon to release! Yes, if you define "matches" as "same MD5 signature". No, otherwise. > If PMC > voted to release "SVN r239620", it might or might not match any of the > previous (RC or Beta or Alpha or Milestone) releases. Indeed, which is why we won't. > Moreover, one might argue there is no point in enforcing RCn == Final > policy as it lacks common sense. Oh c'mon. "common sense" is what led to a solid and verifiable and documented and repeatable release process in the first place. > And in addition to this, RCn is already > out there anyway and re-releasing it is waste of bandwidth. > </vent> Heh. There is a transformation process between an SVN revision and a distribution that is manual, non-trivial, environment-dependent, and fragile. It is because of this that we have things like releases and release candidates. Otherwise we could just have gump or some other build bot autopublish all the stuff it compiles and save ourselves a whole lot of work. These processes weren't invented because there's a bunch of really strange people that totally lack common sense and for some odd reason love fiddling with bits and bytes and votes and showing off authority or anything like that. They exist because of all the experiences we've had with f****d up releases causing nasty problems for years. > But, whatever - it's your PMC. Not really, I'm just one of many. In fact, our PMC is also just one of many. We are a part of the ASF and as such we have a shared responsibility towards all of its users and developers to uphold extremely high quality standards. The "Official ASF release" stamp is a rather big one and its not to be waved around or toyed with. cheers! LSD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
