Re: [Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Simone Giannecchini]

My Take:

- rename Beta to RC
- rather than having an RC2 adding one more release to the existing train
maybe with a shorter timeline if/as needed

The rationale is giving users something testable that does not carry the
Beta or RC tag as soon as possible and account for a initial shorter
release cycle to cover pressing bugs and problems.



Regards,
Simone Giannecchini
==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
==
Ing. Simone Giannecchini
@simogeo
Founder/Director

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob:   +39  333 8128928

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

---
AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 10:26 PM, Torben Barsballe <
tbarsba...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:

> There was some discussion on this topic in the PMC meeting. Salient points:
>
>- Should we rename the beta the RC (Basically, the fork/RC would now
>be 1 month before the .0 release and there wouldn't be a beta release
>anymore).
>   - The most useful naming scheme for would be whatever people are
>   more likely to test
>- Should we still have an RC(2) two weeks before the .0?
>   - Only if there are enough bugfixes to warrant it?
>
> Anyone have further opinions on these?
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 11:23 AM, Torben Barsballe <
> tbarsba...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:
>
>> PR's for the associated doc changes here:
>>
>>- https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/1811
>>- https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/pull/2763
>>
>> We also have a release process diagram which includes the freeze. While
>> not critical, that could be updated - does anyone have the source files for
>> it?
>>
>> Torben
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 8:14 AM, Torben Barsballe <
>> tbarsba...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 8:47 AM, Jody Garnett 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 We could also cut the beta just to confirm master is releasable, and
 not branch. Make the first release candidate the branch to achieve the same
 effect.

 It has the advantage of less moving parts, but we do not get a code
 freeze to focus on bugs. But as you point out that is not happening so
 much.

>>>
>>> Unless I am misunderstanding you, this is what we do currently - branch
>>> on the RC. What are you actually suggesting here?
>>>
>>> Torben
>>>
>>>
>>>
 On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 2:45 AM Ian Turton  wrote:

> I agree we hardly ever see any feedback before the .0 release. Which
> is a shame but nothing we do seems to make a difference to customers.
>
> So +1 for me
>
> Ian
>
> On 16 February 2018 at 09:32, Nuno Oliveira <
> nuno.olive...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:
>
>> I don't have any voting power, just want to express my +1 towards
>> that change ... and indeed I don't see the advantage of the RC release.
>> If users don't provide feedback, bug fix doesn't happen ... what are
>> the advantages of having the RC release ?
>>
>>
>> On 02/16/2018 03:18 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>>
>>> +1. It does seem that we are not 

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Torben Barsballe]

There was some discussion on this topic in the PMC meeting. Salient points:

   - Should we rename the beta the RC (Basically, the fork/RC would now be
   1 month before the .0 release and there wouldn't be a beta release anymore).
  - The most useful naming scheme for would be whatever people are more
  likely to test
   - Should we still have an RC(2) two weeks before the .0?
  - Only if there are enough bugfixes to warrant it?

Anyone have further opinions on these?

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 11:23 AM, Torben Barsballe <
tbarsba...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:

> PR's for the associated doc changes here:
>
>- https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/1811
>- https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/pull/2763
>
> We also have a release process diagram which includes the freeze. While
> not critical, that could be updated - does anyone have the source files for
> it?
>
> Torben
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 8:14 AM, Torben Barsballe <
> tbarsba...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 8:47 AM, Jody Garnett 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We could also cut the beta just to confirm master is releasable, and not
>>> branch. Make the first release candidate the branch to achieve the same
>>> effect.
>>>
>>> It has the advantage of less moving parts, but we do not get a code
>>> freeze to focus on bugs. But as you point out that is not happening so
>>> much.
>>>
>>
>> Unless I am misunderstanding you, this is what we do currently - branch
>> on the RC. What are you actually suggesting here?
>>
>> Torben
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 2:45 AM Ian Turton  wrote:
>>>
 I agree we hardly ever see any feedback before the .0 release. Which is
 a shame but nothing we do seems to make a difference to customers.

 So +1 for me

 Ian

 On 16 February 2018 at 09:32, Nuno Oliveira <
 nuno.olive...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:

> I don't have any voting power, just want to express my +1 towards that
> change ... and indeed I don't see the advantage of the RC release.
> If users don't provide feedback, bug fix doesn't happen ... what are
> the advantages of having the RC release ?
>
>
> On 02/16/2018 03:18 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>
>> +1. It does seem that we are not getting much benefit from waiting
>> until RC to branch, and any fix would be applied to master and the new
>> stable before the .0 release. We could drop the RC altogether. The 
>> current
>> procedure incurs not only a delay but also the work of an extra release
>> (the RC).
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Ben.
>>
>> On 14/02/18 22:58, Andrea Aime wrote:
>>
>>> Hi (apologies for the cross post),
>>> I would like to hear opinions on changing the release procedures
>>> slightly,
>>> and cutting the stable
>>> branch directly on the beta release.
>>>
>>> The reason for not doing the cut on beta but on RC originally was to
>>> push
>>> devs to concentrate
>>> on bug fixing.
>>> However, since then we have shortened the beta life to just two
>>> weeks, we
>>> are not getting significant
>>> feedback from users (which typically starts flowing in on .0 or even
>>> .1
>>> releases), and the bug fixing activity
>>> is rather small (I try to do it anyways, but find myself fixing old
>>> bugs,
>>> not new ones).
>>>
>>> I've also noticed that I routinely created short lived forks of
>>> master to
>>> keep on working on my daily job.
>>> Wondering, am I the only one?
>>>
>>> If not, or if others don't mind anyways, wouldn't it be better to
>>> just cut
>>> the stable branch on beta instead?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Andrea
>>>
>>> ==
>>>
>>> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
>>> http://goo.gl/it488V
>>> for more information.
>>> ==
>>>
>>> Ing. Andrea Aime
>>> @geowolf
>>> Technical Lead
>>>
>>> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>>> Via di Montramito 3/A
>>> 55054  Massarosa (LU)
>>> phone: +39 0584 962313
>>> fax: +39 0584 1660272
>>> mob: +39  339 8844549
>>>
>>> http://www.geo-solutions.it
>>> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>>>
>>> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>>>
>>> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica
>>> e/o
>>> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate.
>>> Il
>>> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
>>> messaggio,
>>> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate
>>> questo
>>> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
>>> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del
>>> messaggio
>>> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio
>>> 

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Torben Barsballe]

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 8:47 AM, Jody Garnett 
wrote:

> We could also cut the beta just to confirm master is releasable, and not
> branch. Make the first release candidate the branch to achieve the same
> effect.
>
> It has the advantage of less moving parts, but we do not get a code freeze
> to focus on bugs. But as you point out that is not happening so much.
>

Unless I am misunderstanding you, this is what we do currently - branch on
the RC. What are you actually suggesting here?

Torben



> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 2:45 AM Ian Turton  wrote:
>
>> I agree we hardly ever see any feedback before the .0 release. Which is a
>> shame but nothing we do seems to make a difference to customers.
>>
>> So +1 for me
>>
>> Ian
>>
>> On 16 February 2018 at 09:32, Nuno Oliveira > it> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't have any voting power, just want to express my +1 towards that
>>> change ... and indeed I don't see the advantage of the RC release.
>>> If users don't provide feedback, bug fix doesn't happen ... what are the
>>> advantages of having the RC release ?
>>>
>>>
>>> On 02/16/2018 03:18 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>>>
 +1. It does seem that we are not getting much benefit from waiting
 until RC to branch, and any fix would be applied to master and the new
 stable before the .0 release. We could drop the RC altogether. The current
 procedure incurs not only a delay but also the work of an extra release
 (the RC).

 Kind regards,
 Ben.

 On 14/02/18 22:58, Andrea Aime wrote:

> Hi (apologies for the cross post),
> I would like to hear opinions on changing the release procedures
> slightly,
> and cutting the stable
> branch directly on the beta release.
>
> The reason for not doing the cut on beta but on RC originally was to
> push
> devs to concentrate
> on bug fixing.
> However, since then we have shortened the beta life to just two weeks,
> we
> are not getting significant
> feedback from users (which typically starts flowing in on .0 or even .1
> releases), and the bug fixing activity
> is rather small (I try to do it anyways, but find myself fixing old
> bugs,
> not new ones).
>
> I've also noticed that I routinely created short lived forks of master
> to
> keep on working on my daily job.
> Wondering, am I the only one?
>
> If not, or if others don't mind anyways, wouldn't it be better to just
> cut
> the stable branch on beta instead?
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> ==
>
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
> http://goo.gl/it488V
> for more information.
> ==
>
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> @geowolf
> Technical Lead
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via di Montramito 3/A
> 55054  Massarosa (LU)
> phone: +39 0584 962313
> fax: +39 0584 1660272
> mob: +39  339 8844549
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
> messaggio,
> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del
> messaggio
> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio
> stesso,
> divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
> utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario
> ai
> principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>
> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely
> for
> the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be
> confidential or
> proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
> (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
> Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure,
> reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or
> partial, is
> strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
> addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
> immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
> information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
> does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content,
> accuracy or
> completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for
> changes
> made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
> e-mail 

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Torben Barsballe]

PR's for the associated doc changes here:

   - https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/1811
   - https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/pull/2763

We also have a release process diagram which includes the freeze. While not
critical, that could be updated - does anyone have the source files for it?

Torben

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 8:14 AM, Torben Barsballe <
tbarsba...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 8:47 AM, Jody Garnett 
> wrote:
>
>> We could also cut the beta just to confirm master is releasable, and not
>> branch. Make the first release candidate the branch to achieve the same
>> effect.
>>
>> It has the advantage of less moving parts, but we do not get a code
>> freeze to focus on bugs. But as you point out that is not happening so
>> much.
>>
>
> Unless I am misunderstanding you, this is what we do currently - branch on
> the RC. What are you actually suggesting here?
>
> Torben
>
>
>
>> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 2:45 AM Ian Turton  wrote:
>>
>>> I agree we hardly ever see any feedback before the .0 release. Which is
>>> a shame but nothing we do seems to make a difference to customers.
>>>
>>> So +1 for me
>>>
>>> Ian
>>>
>>> On 16 February 2018 at 09:32, Nuno Oliveira <
>>> nuno.olive...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:
>>>
 I don't have any voting power, just want to express my +1 towards that
 change ... and indeed I don't see the advantage of the RC release.
 If users don't provide feedback, bug fix doesn't happen ... what are
 the advantages of having the RC release ?


 On 02/16/2018 03:18 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:

> +1. It does seem that we are not getting much benefit from waiting
> until RC to branch, and any fix would be applied to master and the new
> stable before the .0 release. We could drop the RC altogether. The current
> procedure incurs not only a delay but also the work of an extra release
> (the RC).
>
> Kind regards,
> Ben.
>
> On 14/02/18 22:58, Andrea Aime wrote:
>
>> Hi (apologies for the cross post),
>> I would like to hear opinions on changing the release procedures
>> slightly,
>> and cutting the stable
>> branch directly on the beta release.
>>
>> The reason for not doing the cut on beta but on RC originally was to
>> push
>> devs to concentrate
>> on bug fixing.
>> However, since then we have shortened the beta life to just two
>> weeks, we
>> are not getting significant
>> feedback from users (which typically starts flowing in on .0 or even
>> .1
>> releases), and the bug fixing activity
>> is rather small (I try to do it anyways, but find myself fixing old
>> bugs,
>> not new ones).
>>
>> I've also noticed that I routinely created short lived forks of
>> master to
>> keep on working on my daily job.
>> Wondering, am I the only one?
>>
>> If not, or if others don't mind anyways, wouldn't it be better to
>> just cut
>> the stable branch on beta instead?
>>
>> Cheers
>> Andrea
>>
>> ==
>>
>> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
>> http://goo.gl/it488V
>> for more information.
>> ==
>>
>> Ing. Andrea Aime
>> @geowolf
>> Technical Lead
>>
>> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>> Via di Montramito 3/A
>> 55054  Massarosa (LU)
>> phone: +39 0584 962313
>> fax: +39 0584 1660272
>> mob: +39  339 8844549
>>
>> http://www.geo-solutions.it
>> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>>
>> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>>
>> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
>> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate.
>> Il
>> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
>> messaggio,
>> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate
>> questo
>> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
>> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del
>> messaggio
>> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio
>> stesso,
>> divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo,
>> od
>> utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario
>> ai
>> principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>>
>> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended
>> solely for
>> the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be
>> confidential or
>> proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
>> (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data
>> Protection
>> Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure,
>> reproduction,
>> copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or
>> 

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Torben Barsballe]

First of all, the change seems reasonable, so +1 there.

I have no issues with applying these changes right away for the beta
release next week, and we can do a GSIP later. I'll also update the release
docs while I do the release.

Torben

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 8:30 AM, Andrea Aime 
wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 4:18 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies 
> wrote:
>
>> +1. It does seem that we are not getting much benefit from waiting until
>> RC to branch, and any fix would be applied to master and the new stable
>> before the .0 release. We could drop the RC altogether. The current
>> procedure incurs not only a delay but also the work of an extra release
>> (the RC).
>>
>
> As far as I remember there are just Jukka (and sometimes Brad too?)
> testing betas/RC and providing timely feedback, so yeah,
> I guess that for a single person the beta should suffice :-)
>
> This is a larger change to the release procedures, I guess we need a
> GSIP... Torben, you are the release
> manager for the beta, how do you feel about a "shortcut", apply these
> changes right away if there are
> no complaints and do a GSIP later?
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrea Aime
>
> ==
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
> ==
>
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> @geowolf
> Technical Lead
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via di Montramito 3/A
> 
> 55054  Massarosa
> 
> (LU)
> phone: +39 0584 962313 <+39%200584%20962313>
> fax: +39 0584 1660272 <+39%200584%20166%200272>
> mob: +39  339 8844549 <+39%20339%20884%204549>
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
> divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
> utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
> principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>
> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
> the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
> proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
> (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
> Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
> strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
> addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
> immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
> information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
> does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
> completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
> made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
> e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
>
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Andrea Aime]

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:44 AM, Ian Turton  wrote:

> I agree we hardly ever see any feedback before the .0 release. Which is a
> shame but nothing we do seems to make a difference to customers.
>

Ah hem, "users" :-p

Cheers
Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39  339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Jody Garnett]

We could also cut the beta just to confirm master is releasable, and not
branch. Make the first release candidate the branch to achieve the same
effect.

It has the advantage of less moving parts, but we do not get a code freeze
to focus on bugs. But as you point out that is not happening so much.
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 2:45 AM Ian Turton  wrote:

> I agree we hardly ever see any feedback before the .0 release. Which is a
> shame but nothing we do seems to make a difference to customers.
>
> So +1 for me
>
> Ian
>
> On 16 February 2018 at 09:32, Nuno Oliveira <
> nuno.olive...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:
>
>> I don't have any voting power, just want to express my +1 towards that
>> change ... and indeed I don't see the advantage of the RC release.
>> If users don't provide feedback, bug fix doesn't happen ... what are the
>> advantages of having the RC release ?
>>
>>
>> On 02/16/2018 03:18 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>>
>>> +1. It does seem that we are not getting much benefit from waiting until
>>> RC to branch, and any fix would be applied to master and the new stable
>>> before the .0 release. We could drop the RC altogether. The current
>>> procedure incurs not only a delay but also the work of an extra release
>>> (the RC).
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Ben.
>>>
>>> On 14/02/18 22:58, Andrea Aime wrote:
>>>
 Hi (apologies for the cross post),
 I would like to hear opinions on changing the release procedures
 slightly,
 and cutting the stable
 branch directly on the beta release.

 The reason for not doing the cut on beta but on RC originally was to
 push
 devs to concentrate
 on bug fixing.
 However, since then we have shortened the beta life to just two weeks,
 we
 are not getting significant
 feedback from users (which typically starts flowing in on .0 or even .1
 releases), and the bug fixing activity
 is rather small (I try to do it anyways, but find myself fixing old
 bugs,
 not new ones).

 I've also noticed that I routinely created short lived forks of master
 to
 keep on working on my daily job.
 Wondering, am I the only one?

 If not, or if others don't mind anyways, wouldn't it be better to just
 cut
 the stable branch on beta instead?

 Cheers
 Andrea

 ==

 GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
 http://goo.gl/it488V
 for more information.
 ==

 Ing. Andrea Aime
 @geowolf
 Technical Lead

 GeoSolutions S.A.S.
 Via di Montramito 3/A
 55054  Massarosa (LU)
 phone: +39 0584 962313
 fax: +39 0584 1660272
 mob: +39  339 8844549

 http://www.geo-solutions.it
 http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

 AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

 Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
 nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
 loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
 per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
 messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
 darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
 stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio
 stesso,
 divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
 utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
 principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

 The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely
 for
 the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential
 or
 proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
 (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
 Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure,
 reproduction,
 copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or
 partial, is
 strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
 addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
 immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
 information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
 does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy
 or
 completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
 made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
 e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.




 --
 Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
 engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot



 ___
 Geoserver-devel mailing list
 

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Andrea Aime]

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 4:18 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies 
wrote:

> +1. It does seem that we are not getting much benefit from waiting until
> RC to branch, and any fix would be applied to master and the new stable
> before the .0 release. We could drop the RC altogether. The current
> procedure incurs not only a delay but also the work of an extra release
> (the RC).
>

As far as I remember there are just Jukka (and sometimes Brad too?) testing
betas/RC and providing timely feedback, so yeah,
I guess that for a single person the beta should suffice :-)

This is a larger change to the release procedures, I guess we need a
GSIP... Torben, you are the release
manager for the beta, how do you feel about a "shortcut", apply these
changes right away if there are
no complaints and do a GSIP later?

Cheers
Andrea

-- 

Regards,

Andrea Aime

==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39  339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Simone Giannecchini]

+1


Regards,
Simone Giannecchini
==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
==
Ing. Simone Giannecchini
@simogeo
Founder/Director

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob:   +39  333 8128928

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

---
AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate.
Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora
riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo
cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla
distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema.
Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte,
distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità
diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal
D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely
for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be
confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of
privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New
Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any
disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either
dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except
previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by
telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message
that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty
or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent
messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes made after they
were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail
transmission, viruses, etc.


On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:32 AM, Nuno Oliveira
 wrote:
> I don't have any voting power, just want to express my +1 towards that
> change ... and indeed I don't see the advantage of the RC release.
> If users don't provide feedback, bug fix doesn't happen ... what are the
> advantages of having the RC release ?
>
>
> On 02/16/2018 03:18 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>>
>> +1. It does seem that we are not getting much benefit from waiting until
>> RC to branch, and any fix would be applied to master and the new stable
>> before the .0 release. We could drop the RC altogether. The current
>> procedure incurs not only a delay but also the work of an extra release (the
>> RC).
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Ben.
>>
>> On 14/02/18 22:58, Andrea Aime wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi (apologies for the cross post),
>>> I would like to hear opinions on changing the release procedures
>>> slightly,
>>> and cutting the stable
>>> branch directly on the beta release.
>>>
>>> The reason for not doing the cut on beta but on RC originally was to push
>>> devs to concentrate
>>> on bug fixing.
>>> However, since then we have shortened the beta life to just two weeks, we
>>> are not getting significant
>>> feedback from users (which typically starts flowing in on .0 or even .1
>>> releases), and the bug fixing activity
>>> is rather small (I try to do it anyways, but find myself fixing old bugs,
>>> not new ones).
>>>
>>> I've also noticed that I routinely created short lived forks of master to
>>> keep on working on my daily job.
>>> Wondering, am I the only one?
>>>
>>> If not, or if others don't mind anyways, wouldn't it be better to just
>>> cut
>>> the stable branch on beta instead?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Andrea
>>>
>>> ==
>>>
>>> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
>>> http://goo.gl/it488V
>>> for more information.
>>> ==
>>>
>>> Ing. Andrea Aime
>>> @geowolf
>>> Technical Lead
>>>
>>> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>>> Via di Montramito 3/A
>>> 55054  Massarosa (LU)
>>> phone: +39 0584 962313
>>> fax: +39 0584 1660272
>>> mob: +39  339 8844549
>>>
>>> http://www.geo-solutions.it
>>> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>>>
>>> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>>>
>>> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
>>> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
>>> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
>>> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
>>> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
>>> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
>>> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
>>> divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
>>> utilizzarlo per 

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Nuno Oliveira]

I don't have any voting power, just want to express my +1 towards that change ... and indeed I don't 
see the advantage of the RC release.
If users don't provide feedback, bug fix doesn't happen ... what are the advantages of having the RC 
release ?


On 02/16/2018 03:18 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
+1. It does seem that we are not getting much benefit from waiting until RC to branch, and any fix 
would be applied to master and the new stable before the .0 release. We could drop the RC 
altogether. The current procedure incurs not only a delay but also the work of an extra release 
(the RC).


Kind regards,
Ben.

On 14/02/18 22:58, Andrea Aime wrote:

Hi (apologies for the cross post),
I would like to hear opinions on changing the release procedures slightly,
and cutting the stable
branch directly on the beta release.

The reason for not doing the cut on beta but on RC originally was to push
devs to concentrate
on bug fixing.
However, since then we have shortened the beta life to just two weeks, we
are not getting significant
feedback from users (which typically starts flowing in on .0 or even .1
releases), and the bug fixing activity
is rather small (I try to do it anyways, but find myself fixing old bugs,
not new ones).

I've also noticed that I routinely created short lived forks of master to
keep on working on my daily job.
Wondering, am I the only one?

If not, or if others don't mind anyways, wouldn't it be better to just cut
the stable branch on beta instead?

Cheers
Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39  339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.



--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot



___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel





--
Regards,
Nuno Oliveira
==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V 
for more information.
==

Nuno Miguel Carvalho Oliveira
@nmcoliveira
Software Engineer

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax:  +39 0584 1660272

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

---
AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i 
file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro utilizzo 
è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le finalità 
indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne 
il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di 
procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro 
sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte, 
distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od 

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Ben Caradoc-Davies]

+1. It does seem that we are not getting much benefit from waiting until 
RC to branch, and any fix would be applied to master and the new stable 
before the .0 release. We could drop the RC altogether. The current 
procedure incurs not only a delay but also the work of an extra release 
(the RC).


Kind regards,
Ben.

On 14/02/18 22:58, Andrea Aime wrote:

Hi (apologies for the cross post),
I would like to hear opinions on changing the release procedures slightly,
and cutting the stable
branch directly on the beta release.

The reason for not doing the cut on beta but on RC originally was to push
devs to concentrate
on bug fixing.
However, since then we have shortened the beta life to just two weeks, we
are not getting significant
feedback from users (which typically starts flowing in on .0 or even .1
releases), and the bug fixing activity
is rather small (I try to do it anyways, but find myself fixing old bugs,
not new ones).

I've also noticed that I routinely created short lived forks of master to
keep on working on my daily job.
Wondering, am I the only one?

If not, or if others don't mind anyways, wouldn't it be better to just cut
the stable branch on beta instead?

Cheers
Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39  339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.



--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot



___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel



--
Ben Caradoc-Davies 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

[Geoserver-devel] Suggesting a small change in release procedures: can we cut the stable branch on beta?

[Andrea Aime]

Hi (apologies for the cross post),
I would like to hear opinions on changing the release procedures slightly,
and cutting the stable
branch directly on the beta release.

The reason for not doing the cut on beta but on RC originally was to push
devs to concentrate
on bug fixing.
However, since then we have shortened the beta life to just two weeks, we
are not getting significant
feedback from users (which typically starts flowing in on .0 or even .1
releases), and the bug fixing activity
is rather small (I try to do it anyways, but find myself fixing old bugs,
not new ones).

I've also noticed that I routinely created short lived forks of master to
keep on working on my daily job.
Wondering, am I the only one?

If not, or if others don't mind anyways, wouldn't it be better to just cut
the stable branch on beta instead?

Cheers
Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39  339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel