I feel strongly against having to have the release notes updated on the website before being able to roll out an RC. It always takes at least one day to get reviews for that, more on big releases. Then, following RCs might also need to have the notes updated, which delays things even more.
If folks care about having some minimal form of release notes, we can do something similar to what HBase does: https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/CHANGES.txt J-D On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Todd Lipcon <[email protected]> wrote: > Perhaps we can keep voting on this release, finish up the release notes > today, and have a quick turnaround on rc2? I imagine if the diff between > the tags is only in the docs/ directory, we can get the voting done in a > couple hours (just verify the sha/signature, no need to rebuild and retest > if the code is identical) > > -Todd > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Just planning on pushing them to the website when 0.7.1 is available.. > > > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Mike Percy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Or maybe what you're saying is that you're already planning for an RC2. > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Mike Percy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I'm a little confused about this. So you're saying that we won't > > include > > > > release notes in the source artifact for the release? That seems > pretty > > > > atypical. > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans < > > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release > notes > > is > > > >> that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days if > we > > > were > > > >> to wait for them to be written before releasing it. > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes > for > > > >> 0.7.1 > > > >> > before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention > the > > > >> latest > > > >> > version in the included release notes. > > > >> > > > > >> > -Todd > > > >> > > > > >> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans < > > > [email protected] > > > >> > > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache > > Kudu > > > >> > > (incubating) 0.7.1. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process > > of > > > >> > > releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It > also > > > >> takes > > > >> > > care of fixing some licenses. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here: > > > >> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/ > > > >> > > > > > >> > > It was built from this tag: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > The list of all issues fixed can be found here: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > KEYS file: > > > >> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running > > the > > > >> unit > > > >> > > tests. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least > 72 > > > >> hours. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Thanks, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > J-D > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > -- > > > >> > Todd Lipcon > > > >> > Software Engineer, Cloudera > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Todd Lipcon > Software Engineer, Cloudera >
