[I'm dropping people on Cc and bringing this thread back to the mailing list only]
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 6:49 AM James Dailey <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm following this discussion. Or trying to. Thanks for keeping this > onlist and in the jira tickets. Really appreciate it. > > Q on swagger client: Is that already in develop branch? > yup, see https://github.com/apache/fineract/#apache-fineract-platform-api => https://github.com/apache/fineract/blob/develop/docs/developers/swagger/client.md Background in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-838 et al. Big Thank You shout out to Chinmay Kulkarni for his work on this topic! > (Only partly ?) If so, will excluding that from this release create > upstream issues for other dev efforts that rely on that ( if any?). > > +1 on the 'cherry picking from accepted-to- develop branch code w PR > raised against 1.4' approach. (That's a mouthful.) > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 3:39 PM Aleksandar Vidakovic < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Re: last paragraph: thanks Michael; this clarifies a couple of questions >> I had left... and I agree with an earlier date for release 1.5.0 (and >> following)... otherwise it'll also be too much work for anyone who wants to >> upgrade from a previous version. >> >> Will add the gist of this conversation to the release document. >> >> Thanks again >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:24 AM Michael Vorburger <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:20 AM Aleksandar Vidakovic < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Michael, >>>> >>>> ... I'm almost there... my release task generates also GPG signatures >>>> for verification (tested them... all correct). >>>> >>> >>> cool! >>> >>> >>>> Only thing that is left is to include the generated API client JAR; at >>>> the moment only the sources are created, but no JAR artifact is available. >>>> Any idea how to proceed here (as this is a release I guess we shouldn't >>>> include just the client sources)? >>>> >>>> All details here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-1129 >>>> (contains also link to sources) >>>> >>> >>> I'll engage (and answer above re. client) on that JIRA. >>> >>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 9:30 PM Aleksandar Vidakovic < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Alright Michael... the first list it is (WAR, server and client JAR, >>>>> and README). I'll create a PR for the Gradle task. >>>>> >>>>> One more question: I intend to git cherry pick features from develop >>>>> that arrived after I created the release branch... is that OK or do you >>>>> guys usually use different approaches (like rebase)? >>>>> >>>> >>> Either is fine with me personally, but I think the real question here is >>> more another one: >>> >>> Do you want to cherry-pick very selectively just a limited few >>> particular last minute changes, or just rebase to catch up with everything >>> on develop. The latter would in practice really mean that we just branched >>> too soon? ;-) Personally I probably would therefore go for the former (and >>> cherry-pick, only). >>> >>> There's always more coming in, and that's fine. Can't stop progress. You >>> just draw a line in the sand somewhere. There will always be the next >>> release after. Maybe we can have a 1.5.0 sooner after 1.4.0 than we had >>> after 1.3.0? :) Otherwise we'll never release... ;-) >>> >>> A related interesting question is perhaps if YOU (as the RM) should be >>> the one that raises PR for such cherry-picks. I would argue that you >>> shouldn't have to... you "did your job" of the process. You've sent the >>> heads up email, and nobody objected to the timeline you've proposed. Now I >>> personally would probably just let any contributors who still absolutely >>> WANT to get anything into 1.4.0 last minute raise PRs for the 1.4.0 branch >>> themselves (and resolve conflicts, if any; and get them to build). >>> https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/1272 was a great working >>> example of that; as a committer to the project, you can Rebase Merge those >>> yourself in the future (if they are also on develop; I suggest that we do >>> not put anything on 1.4.0 that isn't ALREADY in develop; and NOT the other >>> way around, else it can quickly get very confusing IMHO) . >>> >>> BTW you could perhaps capture a summary of this discussion / conclusion >>> on >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FINERACT/How+to+Release+Apache+Fineract, >>> if you like. >>> >>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 7:48 PM Michael Vorburger <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, 25 Aug 2020, 19:04 Ed Cable, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Nazeer and Shruthi, are you able to provide some input on this >>>>>>> thread based on your experiences leading the release process before. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ed >>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 09:45 Aleksandar Vidakovic < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Michael, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ... I think I saw a release script mentioned somewhere, but don't >>>>>>>> see it anywhere in the repo. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I can put such a release task together for Gradle (aka >>>>>>>> "distribution")... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, that would be really helpful, IMHO! I would be happy to try it >>>>>> out and peer review a PR from you about this, if you would like. >>>>>> >>>>>> that's not too complicated. Just to list the artifacts again: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - WAR >>>>>>>> - server JAR >>>>>>>> - client JAR >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> SGMT, and let's throw in the /README.md, and whatever else the >>>>>> 1.3.0 dist included? >>>>>> >>>>>> How about: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Kubernetes related YAML files >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I wouldn't, because technically that's not even "1.4.0" - it will >>>>>> pull :latest from Docker Hub.. we should deal with that "separately & >>>>>> later" (if ever), IMHO. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - should we add maybe add the Docker Compose file so that >>>>>>>> people can try out Fineract immediately (without installing a >>>>>>>> separate >>>>>>>> MySQL instance) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I also wouldn't, because that won't actually work, because it >>>>>> builds from source, which won't be in *binary.tar.gz; sorting that >>>>>> out seems like a separate future task (new JIRA?), to me. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Aleks >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 4:41 PM Michael Vorburger < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Aleks, I was struggling to understand how you'll actually be >>>>>>>>> building the apache-fineract-1.4.0-binary.tar.gz and >>>>>>>>> apache-fineract-1.3.0-src.tar.gz archives for distribution on >>>>>>>>> http://fineract.apache.org... I was assuming that we had a script >>>>>>>>> or (much better) even directly a Gradle task for it in Fineract, but I >>>>>>>>> couldn't actually find anything like it on git. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FINERACT/How+to+Release+Apache+Fineract, >>>>>>>>> surprisingly, doesn't actually speak to that - or am I just not >>>>>>>>> seeing it? >>>>>>>>> Hoping someone who was involved in past releases may be able to >>>>>>>>> clarify >>>>>>>>> here. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If we never had that, and used to "manually cobble together" these >>>>>>>>> distributions in the past (huh?), then I think it would be great to >>>>>>>>> see a >>>>>>>>> PR contributing this. It would be the first step towards more >>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-876 (later). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I was looking for it to suggest that we include not only the *.war >>>>>>>>> but now also the new server *.jar as well as the very recent client >>>>>>>>> *.jar. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 9:10 AM Aleksandar Vidakovic < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> @Ed Cable <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> going through yesterday's emails from Michael et al. to see what >>>>>>>>>> recent changes have to be included in the 1.4.0 ... had a couple of >>>>>>>>>> power >>>>>>>>>> outages here yesterday. Thanks for the pointers to work that has >>>>>>>>>> been done >>>>>>>>>> on the community app... good to have this on the radar. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:52 PM Ed Cable <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> James, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing up the need for QA. The Mifos Community App >>>>>>>>>>> UI should be relatively in sync with the Finerat 1.4 changes and >>>>>>>>>>> I've put >>>>>>>>>>> the call out for manual QA on Michael's fineract.dev server on >>>>>>>>>>> the Mifos dev lists since a couple week back at >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Francis, Bharath, Sangamesh, Chirag, Alex from Habile, and some >>>>>>>>>>> of our GSOC interns have been involved in the QA thus far at >>>>>>>>>>> https://discourse.mifos.org/t/pull-request-review-and-qa-for-mifos-x-20-08-release/9671 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The corresponding tickets at a UI level that complement the >>>>>>>>>>> Fineract release are being tracked at: >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openMF/community-app/projects/6 or by >>>>>>>>>>> following this milestone on Github: >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openMF/community-app/milestone/1 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Francis nicely summarized the QA he's done to date in this >>>>>>>>>>> Google Doc: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_6kjJxUasLaaZakStDSMKUXw2oqfWt90hzPMuEOFxrE/edit?usp=sharing >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> @Aleksandar Vidakovic <[email protected]> Thank you >>>>>>>>>>> again for taking up the role of release manager. I do think that >>>>>>>>>>> although >>>>>>>>>>> it would push the release out a couple more days we should continue >>>>>>>>>>> doing >>>>>>>>>>> some remaining manual QA this week. There are also two important >>>>>>>>>>> tickets that Avik from Fynarfin is aiming to have fixes for by >>>>>>>>>>> Thursday to >>>>>>>>>>> go into this release: >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-629 and >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-1120 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> With the release branch available, we're deploying it locally to >>>>>>>>>>> some users as well who are testing it in their development >>>>>>>>>>> environments. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Ed >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 1:00 PM Aleksandar Vidakovic < >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I've added a note on >>>>>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FINERACT/How+to+Release+Apache+Fineract >>>>>>>>>>>> about the manual testing. FYI >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 7:52 PM Aleksandar Vidakovic < >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi James, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ... alright... noted. A bit new to the release game here so >>>>>>>>>>>>> the requirement to manually test slipped through the cracks. But >>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe >>>>>>>>>>>>> August might also not be the best of months for a release; >>>>>>>>>>>>> responses to the >>>>>>>>>>>>> various release announcements on the mailing list were a bit >>>>>>>>>>>>> scarce. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Having said that: someone wants to help out with QA as James >>>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned? I'll give it a run on my machine, but would be great >>>>>>>>>>>>> if we get a >>>>>>>>>>>>> couple more people to verify. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Speaking of manual testing - maybe we could do this a bit less >>>>>>>>>>>>> manual... I wanted to propose this already for a while and didn't >>>>>>>>>>>>> get to >>>>>>>>>>>>> it: https://gatling.io/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So technically Gatling is a load testing tool, but it has a >>>>>>>>>>>>> feature called Gatling Recorder ( >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://gatling.io/docs/current/http/recorder/) that allows >>>>>>>>>>>>> you to record all interaction between browser (read: community >>>>>>>>>>>>> app) and >>>>>>>>>>>>> Fineract. That way we could get those test scenarios once >>>>>>>>>>>>> recorded and just >>>>>>>>>>>>> include them in the build as some kind of integration test. The >>>>>>>>>>>>> beauty of >>>>>>>>>>>>> this is that maintenance doesn't require any coding, just run a >>>>>>>>>>>>> specific >>>>>>>>>>>>> scenario again in your browser; could even replace the current >>>>>>>>>>>>> integration >>>>>>>>>>>>> tests in Fineract that should - I guess - cover more or less UI >>>>>>>>>>>>> scenarios, >>>>>>>>>>>>> but are currently a bit neglected. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please ping here on the list if you want to help out. We can >>>>>>>>>>>>> coordinate then for the final release date (I guess that won't be >>>>>>>>>>>>> Monday). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks again for the help James. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Aleks >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 7:20 PM James Dailey < >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alex, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to see and understand the steps we need to take >>>>>>>>>>>>>> w regard to quality assurance (QA). It is vital that we have >>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough test >>>>>>>>>>>>>> coverage. If we don't have that, then we may need to hold off >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release until we do. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In previous releases we always relied heavily on users going >>>>>>>>>>>>>> through each user interface screen to identify bugs. There were >>>>>>>>>>>>>> even bug >>>>>>>>>>>>>> finding rewards. This was true for the decade + that the code >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lived as >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mifos. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since the Mifos front end UIs (multiple) are not yet at the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> same development state, I believe we need to make sure that test >>>>>>>>>>>>>> coverage >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is adequate at the unit level and end to end level. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps other devs could tell is what has been done to ensure >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the QA is there. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there are additional testing needs, let's also make sure >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we have jira tickets for those. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the Mifos UIs on the Mifos dev branches are tracking w >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this 1.4 release exactly, then perhaps that can be used for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> testing >>>>>>>>>>>>>> here. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> QA should also include a look at any security issues that >>>>>>>>>>>>>> were solved. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> @jdailey >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020, 5:42 AM Aleksandar Vidakovic < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Everyone, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As previously announced, I've just created the release >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for our upcoming 1.4.0 release. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can continue working and merging PRs to the develop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for future releases, as always. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The DRAFT release notes are on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FINERACT/1.4.0+-+Apache+Fineract. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone see anything missing? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone have any last minute changes they would like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see cherry-picked to branch 1.4.0, or are we good to go and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actually cut >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the release based on this branch as it is? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll start the final stage of actually creating the release >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 3 days (Monday, August 24) if nobody objects. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aleks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> *Ed Cable* >>>>>>>>>>> President/CEO, Mifos Initiative >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] | Skype: edcable | Mobile: +1.484.477.8649 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Collectively Creating a World of 3 Billion Maries | * >>>>>>>>>>> http://mifos.org <http://facebook.com/mifos> >>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.twitter.com/mifos> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
