Daniel, I am very much interested in a smooth and more automated release process. However, I am very unfamiliar regarding what is all involved and cannot judge if it is complete. You'd probably want Jim's input on this.
Cheers, Stefan > Am 09.12.2017 um 21:05 schrieb Daniel Ruggeri <[email protected]>: > > With about a month of time the vote has been running and just a single > +1 (my own), I'm of the opinion that this release has died on the vine. > I am sensitive to the fact that this is the holiday season, so I will > keep it open only a few more days so folks can pipe up if they are still > testing or need more time to evaluate the release. > > > While it's OK and all if we don't push 2.5.0-alpha, I'm wondering if > anyone has been able to at least validate the structural stuff involving > the release? As in... Was the signature good? Did the release tarball > appear to be laid out as expected? Did the tags and source files show up > where/how we expect in trunk? Assuming that's all good, I'd like to > volunteer for 2.4.next... but I'd like confirmation. > > > I'm also acutely interested in those aspects because they are the result > of the machinery created to prepare the tags for a release and the first > time I've used the existing scripts per documentation. If an adjustment > (to the script I created, the existing scripts that are used, or the > documentation on how to roll a release) is needed, I'd like to > straighten that out now before moving forward with tying it all together > with an automated build plan. > > -- > Daniel Ruggeri > > On 11/7/2017 8:36 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: >> Hi, all; >> >> Please find the proposed 2.5.0-alpha release tarballs and signatures >> at the following location. This release candidate was tagged from trunk >> as of r1814469: >> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ >> >> >> I'd like to call a vote to release this alpha candidate. Please do note >> - this is my first attempt at cutting a release and mistakes are likely. >> Therefore, I'll let the vote run at least 10 days (possibly more as I >> will be traveling to Dublin next week) and will greatly appreciate any >> additional scrutiny the release tarball can be given. >> >> >> >> Some notes to share after having executed the process for the first time: >> >> * I'm not 100% sure on the proper syntax for an alpha candidate with the >> release.sh[1] script. I used "./release.sh --tag 2.5.0-alpha alpha >> httpd-2.5 2.5.0 '[email protected]". This seems to have produced >> desired results. >> >> * I created two scripts[2] to automate the tagging of SVN and minor file >> modifications associated with a release as well as the push of the >> tarballs/signatures to the repo mirror. Unfortunately, I lack the karma >> to commit to site/trunk. How do I obtain this karma? >> >> * I'd like to make some updates to the documentation[3] about how to >> produce releases to point out the existence of the new scripts and make >> the process more clear. Same note about karma to site/ applies. >> >> * The documentation mentioned to AP_SERVER_DEVBUILD_BOOLEAN to 0 for the >> tagged release. I assume this still holds true for an alpha release. >> >> * Blockers for automation really only seem to live around credential >> management (svn password and keyring passphrase) and the conducting of >> the vote itself over email. Kudos to everyone involved for putting >> together the scripting that already exists! >> >> * I'd like to create yet another script that does a pre-flight check for >> a machine to ensure that the host it is run on has the dependencies all >> of the above scripts need. Thing is, other than java for the docs build >> and gpg... I'm not sure what those other things may be (or even if there >> are any). Pointers welcome. >> >> >> [1] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/site/trunk/tools/release.sh >> >> [2] http://people.apache.org/~druggeri/scripts/ >> >> [3] http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html >> >> >> P.S. >> >> I'll be in Dublin next week if anyone would like to catch up! >> >
