I do agree 48 hours might be a little short timespan for regressions.

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 01:45, Michael Jurewitz <[email protected]> wrote:
> Likewise, Aaron, you have made incredible contributions to this whole 
> process.  Increasing the bus-factor and having more folks who are able to 
> handle a release would indeed be great.
>
> On the release timing front, I actually think something longer than four 
> weeks should be the default goal.  Artificially limiting to four weeks may 
> make it difficult to get larger scale feature work completed.  I also think 
> that more frequent releases won't actually benefit the users and businesses 
> who rely on Rails.  Instead, it will only make it more complex to keep in 
> step with changes in the frameworks while ensuring existing apps still run.
>
> Along those lines, 48 hours for regressions is entirely too short.  It 
> doesn't do the project any good to aggressively declare GM on a release only 
> to have to spin fast subsequent updates because a major issue was not 
> identified fast enough.  I wouldn't want to see any less than a week for 
> regression reports.
>
> -Jury
>
> On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:01 PM, Prem Sichanugrist wrote:
>
>> Aaron,
>>
>> 1) I'm totally agree on that one. Let's stick with this four weeks release 
>> cycle
>> for RC cut, and 48 hours for regression report.
>>
>> 2) You've always done a great job for the Ruby on Rails community. From what
>> you said, I think it make a lot of sense to rotate the release 
>> responsibility to
>> every core team member. I mean, it should not be *your* responsibility to do
>> the hard work and release the gem every time. And you shouldn't be the only
>> one to take the blame if the release is broken.
>>
>> It would be totally worth it if you can provide everybody the process of 
>> cutting a
>> release. In that case, everybody will have a reference on what to do, and 
>> will
>> be able to cut the release, in the perfect quality as you did, in the future.
>>
>> Thank you for your contribution to Rails community. I think we're all 
>> appreciate
>> your contribution. <3 <3 <3
>>
>> - Prem
>>
>> On Jul 25, 2011, at 8:15 PM, Aaron Patterson wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> I want to talk about the release process.  Specifically, I want to talk 
>>> about
>>> how we can improve our release process.
>>>
>>> There are a couple things I want to see in our release process:
>>>
>>> 1) Regular, periodic releases.
>>>
>>> I had been shooting for every four weeks for the 3.0.x series.  I don't 
>>> think
>>> this means we have to be held to a particular deadline. I think that if 
>>> people
>>> know that approximately every N weeks, we'll have a release, it will help
>>> reduce upgrade friction.
>>>
>>> Mainly what this means to me is setting expectations with the community, and
>>> sticking to what we say.
>>>
>>> 2) Distributed responsibility
>>>
>>> I would like to improve our Bus Factor.  Today, I am the only one doing
>>> releases.  That means we have a Bus Factor of one.  If I get hit, who will 
>>> take
>>> responsibility?
>>>
>>> In order to fix this, I think we need other core team members to do 
>>> releases.
>>> In fact, I think it should be a requirement *as a core team member* to do
>>> releases.
>>>
>>> We require that core team members are able to work on all aspects of Rails 
>>> (AR,
>>> AS, AP, etc).  If we make this requirement for the code base, we need to 
>>> make
>>> this requirement of our process.
>>>
>>> We all need to go through the pain of the rubber actually hitting the road.
>>> We all need to make the tough decision to release, or to face our users and
>>> tell them why it is late.
>>>
>>> I propose that we each take turns releasing Rails, and we publish who will 
>>> be
>>> doing which release.  I think it will improve our Bus Factor, frequency and
>>> stability of our releases, and improve our team overall.
>>>
>>> If we can agree on these items, I will put together documentation about how 
>>> to
>>> release Rails, along with a roster of who will be releasing what.  I will 
>>> even
>>> personally work with each core team member until we're all comfortable with 
>>> the
>>> process.
>>>
>>> The status quo cannot remain.  I can't be around all the time to do 
>>> releases,
>>> as frankly, it's burning me out.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Aaron Patterson
>>> http://tenderlovemaking.com/
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit this group at 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby 
on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

Reply via email to