In my opinion, our release process takes too long but that's ok for the second release - we just need to improve upon it. Instead of waiting for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-11084, I would suggest to create a branch for 0.9 and move on. This would also be useful for pure maintenance releases we want to do. So maybe we could make this a general policy. Any objections?
Regards, Matthias From: Deron Eriksson <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: 01/15/2016 01:52 PM Subject: Re: Starting a SystemML 0.9 release Regarding the documentation, if analytics_on in docs/_config.yml is set to false when jekyll is run, then analytics is not added to the rendered HTML, which would probably be a good idea for docs in a packaged release (if the documentation site is packaged with the release). Additionally, SYSTEMML_VERSION in docs/_config.yml sets the SystemML version references in the rendered HTML, so it should be set to 0.9 when docs are generated for a release. Deron On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Deron Eriksson <[email protected]> wrote: > If docs are included in the release distributions, it would be nice if > they were the generated (mostly) HTML documentation in docs/_site after > running jekyll. This would give users a complete set of documentation for > the release. This includes the aforementioned Algorithms Reference pdf and > all of the documentation currently available online. > > Deron > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Deron Eriksson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi Luciano, >> >> WRT docs, it would be nice to have a snapshot of the generated >> documentation site (like http://apache.github.io/incubator-systemml/). >> This allows a historical display of documentation similar to Spark ( >> http://spark.apache.org/documentation.html). If that is available >> online, is it necessary to package the Algorithms Reference PDF or README >> with the releases? Also, the docs/README.md describes generating the >> documentation site from markdown using jekyll so I'm not sure if that would >> help anyone if the *.md files aren't included in the release distributions. >> Or is this a different README? >> >> Deron >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Matthias Boehm <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> great - thanks Niketan. From my perspective, we're also good to go. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Matthias >>> >>> [image: Inactive hide details for Niketan Pansare---01/15/2016 11:56:55 >>> AM---Hi all, As FYI, I ran some performance experiments this we]Niketan >>> Pansare---01/15/2016 11:56:55 AM---Hi all, As FYI, I ran some performance >>> experiments this week and the release >>> >>> From: Niketan Pansare/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS >>> To: [email protected] >>> Date: 01/15/2016 11:56 AM >>> Subject: Re: Starting a SystemML 0.9 release >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> As FYI, I ran some performance experiments this week and the release >>> SystemML 0.9 looks good to me :) >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Niketan Pansare >>> IBM Almaden Research Center >>> E-mail: npansar At us.ibm.com >>> *http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?person=us-npansar* >>> <http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?person=us-npansar > >>> >>> Mike Dusenberry ---01/14/2016 06:49:31 PM---The DML Language Reference >>> would be great to have as well. Also, in general, I think we should only >>> >>> From: Mike Dusenberry <[email protected]> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Date: 01/14/2016 06:49 PM >>> Subject: Re: Starting a SystemML 0.9 release >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> >>> The DML Language Reference would be great to have as well. >>> >>> Also, in general, I think we should only have the Javadocs for end-user >>> facing code, such MLContext, rather than for any deep internals that a >>> user >>> is not going to interact with. >>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:26 PM Luciano Resende <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > What should be the minimum documentation to add to the release >>> distribution >>> > ? >>> > >>> > Currently we have : >>> > docs/README.txt >>> > docs/SysteML_Algorithms_Reference.pdf >>> > >>> > I was planning to add the javadocs as well. >>> > >>> > But I still think we have much more available in trunk that we could >>> add... >>> > >>> > Suggestions are welcome... >>> > >>> > >>> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Luciano Resende < >>> [email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > Also, for fixed jiras, I did the following query : >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> *https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SYSTEMML-376?jql=project%20%3D%20SYSTEMML%20AND%20status%20in%20%28Resolved%2C%20Closed%29%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%202015-10-27* >>> < https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SYSTEMML-376?jql=project%20%3D%20SYSTEMML%20AND%20status%20in%20%28Resolved%2C%20Closed%29%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%202015-10-27 > >>> > > >>> > > And was wondering if we could all move this to 0.9 release. >>> > > >>> > > Could someone please help me verify. >>> > > >>> > > Thanks >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Luciano Resende < >>> [email protected]> >>> > > wrote: >>> > > >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Matthias Boehm <[email protected] >>> > >>> > >> wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >>> great - thanks everybody. Let's get these two fixes in and close >>> the >>> > >>> release. Until that point, please no new features. The version >>> number >>> > 0.9 >>> > >>> is fine with me since it's not really a pure maintenance release as >>> > many >>> > >>> new features went in too. Down the road, however, we need to think >>> > about >>> > >>> release branches. >>> > >>> >>> > >> We can create release branches now, or from the tag when we need a >>> 0.9.1 >>> > >> for example. As we are not a large project with tens of prs coming >>> very >>> > >> quick, I would recommend to create the branch as needed for minor >>> > releases. >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> -- >>> > >> Luciano Resende >>> > >> *http://people.apache.org/~lresende* >>> <http://people.apache.org/~lresende> >>> > >> *http://twitter.com/lresende1975* <http://twitter.com/lresende1975 > >>> > >> *http://lresende.blogspot.com/* <http://lresende.blogspot.com/> >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > Luciano Resende >>> > > *http://people.apache.org/~lresende* >>> <http://people.apache.org/~lresende> >>> > > *http://twitter.com/lresende1975* <http://twitter.com/lresende1975> >>> > > *http://lresende.blogspot.com/* <http://lresende.blogspot.com/> >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Luciano Resende >>> > *http://people.apache.org/~lresende* >>> <http://people.apache.org/~lresende> >>> > *http://twitter.com/lresende1975* <http://twitter.com/lresende1975> >>> > *http://lresende.blogspot.com/* <http://lresende.blogspot.com/> >>> > >>> -- >>> Mike Dusenberry >>> GitHub: github.com/dusenberrymw >>> LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/mikedusenberry >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >
