On 2009-11-26, at 8:04 AM, Todd Thiessen wrote:
I can only speak from experience with what we have done here
internally but I can also attest that releasing too often is a real
pain. You end up having a bunch of releases publicized that no one
cares about. It only serves to clutter a repository and makes it
confusing to consumers wrt which one to use.
I love the agile model of development but I don't think this equates
to "releasing something immediately if there are fixes available" as
Jason put it. The release needs to be weighed against the value it
provides and the extra time and effort the community needs to soak
and test that release. Agile states that your software should be
releasable at anytime, but it does not state that it should be
continually released.
Of course, the opposite (ie: not releasing enough) is just as bad if
not worse. Have to find that sweet spot ;-).
The logic here is flawed because it is from a single perspective of an
individual who finds it burdensome to validate each and every release.
The value of releasing everyday if there is a fix is because that fix
may be very valuable to a user.
I pushed extremely aggressively against Benjamin and Igor to put in
place the regression test suite and performance framework so that we
don't have to fear validation for the most part. I'm confident at this
point that we're going to find the problems before any of you do 95%
of the time. This is how it should be. When we have a fix it should be
made immediately available in a consumable form by the general public
because it probably matters to someone. We are at this point
responding to people taking the time to accurate report errors. If you
watch the process that happens it usually a matter of hours before
Benjamin fixes it.
The release process here is entirely broken from a users perspective,
but that's the Apache Way. Here people think developers are more
important then users which is why we have the contorted set of
practices we have here now. The work needs to be instantly validated
and we can do that now, and once that criterion is met it should be
released. This is not the case with many of our plugins which can have
a dire impact on users because the tests for critical plugins that
just haven't gotten the attention they need yet. I plan to help try
and fix this as well but there's only so much that can be done at a
time.
These are alphas and getting them out as soon as the rules allow here
is important for people trying to evaluate 3.x.
---
Todd Thiessen
-----Original Message-----
From: paulus.benedic...@gmail.com
[mailto:paulus.benedic...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Paul Benedict
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 9:21 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: voting was: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.0-alpha-5
I would also like to contribute my frustration with the
current build process. It's great the alpha releases are
coming out often, but I cannot possibly be testing them at
the frequency you guys are currently tagging and voting. I
thought the "once a week" alpha was a good idea until it
actually happened. If you guys voted once every three weeks,
it would be much easier for me to participate. I wonder if
others believe the same.
Paul
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Jason van Zyl
<ja...@maven.org> wrote:
Let's not beat the dead horse. No one cares. There's not
good reason
for not releasing something immediately if there are fixes
available.
That's just not the way it works here, that's fine and not
a big deal.
On 2009-11-25, at 7:52 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 26/11/2009, at 6:24 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
If ever we really needed to push out builds more
frequently I would
just do it from Sonatype. I've given up trying to be
truly agile at
Apache, it's just not going to happen.
I don't understand what the issue is with the current process.
Benjamin is already getting them out faster than the majority of
people will be able to test and review them. Any faster
and you might
as well just be using the CI builds for whatever purpose
you have in
mind. You're not going to be able to push out anything
from Sonatype
that's any more official than those, so what benefit does
anyone get
from a build that loses the frequency of CI builds and
loses the benefit of being reviewed before publishing?
The rules about not promoting snapshots to users are there
for good
reasons - to make sure the PMC does actually authorize
releases and
the users know what they are getting, and to encourage
actually doing
releases (instead of everyone running their own version of
trunk). I
don't see any upside to a change that loses those. There's
no problem
pointing individuals to the grid for *testing* purposes as
far as I
know, as long as they know what they are getting is not a
release and may not work at all.
Thanks,
Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For
additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For
additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For
additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
