On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Caleb James DeLisle <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 05/22/2012 04:52 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: >> >> 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? > > Sounds good, to prevent issues having their fix-for version set as the > released version, it makes sense to release on jira right away but post-date > the release so that dates line up. > Anyway this is something we can leave open to experimentation until the right > decision makes itself obvious.
We should probably move the jira update from push-release.sh to maven-release.sh and executed right after we finished releasing a project. It was already a big fuzzy even before since you could have commons actually released since a long time before you actually release it on jira (not time to finish the full release, etc...). > > Caleb > > >> >>> 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 +1 >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> _______________________________________________ >> devs mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs -- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
