+1 to go with a single Vote process

On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
[email protected]> wrote:

> So, different projects seem to follow different internal release processes.
> Some follow a single vote and some follow the two-tiered approach.
>
> The point of the first branch vote is to determine whether or not the
> community agrees on what will be contained in the release.
>
> The second vote is to verify that all of the 'formal' derivative release
> artifacts/products are correct.
>
> We can go with a single vote process, but it seemed to make sense to me to
> use a double internal vote until we are comfortable with releasing and work
> out some of the kinks.  Either way, I think that we should cut release
> branches and generate release artifacts from there.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Suneel Marthi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I am thinking we could have one Vote that runs for 72 hrs, approving the
> > candidate release branch would also mean testing and validating the
> > artifacts. correct?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > After some hiccups last night getting the pom ready for release (thanks
> > for
> > > fixing it Suneel!), we can now  proceed with release voting. After we
> get
> > > through our first release, our initial process will be documented on
> the
> > > website for ease of access. In the future, we will send 'true' VOTE
> > emails
> > > without all of the extra commentary.
> > >
> > > [Mentors: Please correct any info/process that I have gotten wrong
> below
> > -
> > > thanks!]
> > >
> > > Following some of the best practice guidelines, let's hold our internal
> > > release Pirk vote in two stages:
> > >
> > > 1) Vote-1 to approve the 0.1.0 candidate release branch
> > >
> > > If that passes, then...
> > >
> > > 2) Vote-2 to approve the resulting files listed below, which will be
> > posted
> > > at '
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/pirk/
> > > pirk-0.1.0-incubating'
> > > for the release:
> > >
> > >    - apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.tar.gz
> > >    - apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.tar.gz.asc
> > >    - apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.tar.gz.md5
> > >    - apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.tar.gz.sha1
> > >
> > > Once Vote-1 closes with +1 from at least 3 Pirk PPMC members, we will
> > move
> > > on to Vote-2. After Vote-2 passes, we can move to call a Pirk release
> > vote
> > > with the IPMC. Once the IPMC vote passes, we can push the first Pirk
> > maven
> > > artifact.
> > >
> > > I have tagged all JIRAs completed for this release with 'FixVersion =
> > > 0.1.0'. You can view them here:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> > > project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> > >
> > > The following steps were used to prepare the branch (some Apache
> projects
> > > have nice scripts to automate some of these checks -- we should
> consider
> > > using one too):
> > >
> > >    - Verified the items Release Checklist (below, except for the
> > checksums
> > >    and signatures for the branch cut)
> > >    - mvn clean release:clean
> > >    - mvn release:prepare -Darguments="-DskipTests" (new version:
> > >    0.1.0-incubating; SCM: apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating; new dev
> version:
> > >    0.1.1-SNAPSHOT)
> > >    - mvn -Psigned_release release:perform -DdryRun=true
> > >    -Darguments="-DskipTests"
> > >
> > > where 'signed_release' is defined in the maven settings.xml file as in
> > > Suneel's example here:
> > > https://gist.github.com/smarthi/ac1b5058f05ab17d2f84862940ec4eba
> > >
> > > Please vote as follows:
> > >
> > > +1 -- Accept this candidate release branch
> > > -1 -- Don't accept this candidate release branch because....
> > >
> > > This vote will run for 72 hours.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Ellison Anne
> > >
> > > _____
> > >
> > > Release Checklist:
> > >
> > >    - Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> > >    - Build is successful including automated tests.
> > >    - DISCLAIMER is correct, filenames include "incubating".
> > >    - Top-level LICENSE and NOTICE are correct
> > >    - All source files have license headers where appropriate, RAT
> checks
> > >    pass
> > >    - The provenance of all source files is clear (ASF or software
> grants)
> > >    - Dependencies licenses are ok as per http://apache.org/legal/
> > >    - Release consists of source code only, no binaries.
> > >
> > > Apache Release Documentation:
> > >
> > >    - Apache Release Guide: http://www.apache.org/dev/
> release-publishing
> > >    - Apache Release Policy: http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> > >    - Apache Incubator Release Guidelines: http://incubator.
> > >    apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
> > >    <http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html>
> > >    - Apache Incubator Release Policy: http://incubator.
> > >    apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases
> > >    <http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.
> > html#Releases
> > > >
> > >    - For Maven Release: http://www.apache.org/dev/publishing-maven-
> > >    artifacts.html
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to