I was thinking of it more like my other projects, where I typically do a small QA pass over the release, specifically testing several of the new patches and regression testing existing features that have a recent history of quality problems. That kind of RC validation typically takes me multiple hours to complete.
I'm happy to try the weekly cadence and possibly settle into a shorter validation process. We can tune the process later if we start to see the weekly votes fizzle. +1 overall for the plan. --Chris Nauroth On 12/10/15, 10:53 AM, "Sean Busbey" <[email protected]> wrote: >On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Chris Nauroth ><[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 2. If I'm reading this correctly, you're suggesting weekly releases if >> there are code changes. With only 6 PMC members who have binding votes, >> it's a lot to ask of a small number of people. I see a risk of many of >> these votes fizzling out and expiring without getting enough binding >> votes. How would you feel about a longer regular cadence, such as >> monthly, with the option to invoke additional out-of-band releases as >> needed for critical fixes? >> > >I'm not sure. For most of the projects I'm involved in, I'd agree. But >for Yetus we dog food almost everything. At the time of a RC, it seems >like the only thing to do is check hashes and signatures on two files. > >How much time would that be? We won't really know until we start >having them, I suppose. If it's ~10 minutes, is that too much? >
