On May 22, 2012, at 10:55 AM, Caleb James DeLisle wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to add staging to our official release process. > For milestone releases, I propose the staging cycle be for "0 time" (this may > be revisited later).
+1 > For RC or finals, we place the release in staging and immediately call a VOTE > to publish the release, this gives our testing team (everybody!) 72 hours to > raise a potential issue. +1 with the proviso that we need to take that into account when we publish release dates. When we say that 4.1RC1 will be released on 11th of June, I guess it means we need to release RC1 on 11th - 72 hours then? > Why: > > #1. After some chat on IRC I decided that it is advantageous to move toward a > faster release cycle and begin moving away from milestone releases in favor > of staging. This will set the stage for the release method we will need. > > #2. Staging is easy, I've modified the release script to include staging and > with the script, it is a simple matter of about 5 clicks on nexus to "login", > "close repository", "release repository". > > #3. Staging is safe, the RM need not worry about fat fingers breaking the > release, all it costs is time. > > #4. The release process should be as close to the same as possible for > milestone and RC/final releases. This simplifies scripting of the process, > decreases the amount the RM must remember and makes every milestone release a > rehearsal. > > #5. Everybody else is doing it (is that even a reason?!) > > > Mandatory? > I would rather impress the RM with how easy and helpful staging can be than > bind him with rules. > If I had followed the existing process to the letter, I would not have had > any experience with staging to begin with. > In the interest of continuous improvement I would like to make this a strong > recommendation, not a strict rule. > > > Here's my +1 +1 Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
