Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
2013/6/26 Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org: On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: If people are fine with that, I will try to make the 0.99.0 release myself, automating things a little, with the goal of reducing at a minimum the work involved. I'm not going to be able to write per module release notes and such, but I guess having the tarballs is better than nothing. Yes, no need for release notes. There is already a release script somewhere that makes the rest almost effortless - ask Manuel. Yes, there is a release script in this repository: https://git.sugarlabs.org/sugar-tools So to release: ./sugar-tools/release It automatically increases the version. But If you want to be sure, you can pass it to the script: ./sugar-tools/release -v 0.99.1 Just one note: for the sugar component, SUCROSE_VERSION needs to be manually incremented before release. See commits like 5d1837e3d9bf794801b14aa590e5a793265bd76a . -- .. manuq .. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
I was aware of those scripts but I think there are a few advantages to integrate release automation with the rest of our build infrastructure (buildbot and sugar-build). I have that more or less working. We just need to update the version in configure.ac and a tarball will be made available at the usual place by buildbot (well, I need one of our sysadmins to give permissions to the buildbot user before that can really happen, but the code is working). On 27 June 2013 14:06, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.org wrote: Just one note: for the sugar component, SUCROSE_VERSION needs to be manually incremented before release. See commits like 5d1837e3d9bf794801b14aa590e5a793265bd76a . It seems to be 0.99 at the moment, is that what it's supposed to be until we release 0.100? ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
2013/6/27 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: I was aware of those scripts but I think there are a few advantages to integrate release automation with the rest of our build infrastructure (buildbot and sugar-build). I have that more or less working. We just need to update the version in configure.ac and a tarball will be made available at the usual place by buildbot (well, I need one of our sysadmins to give permissions to the buildbot user before that can really happen, but the code is working). Impressive! On 27 June 2013 14:06, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.org wrote: Just one note: for the sugar component, SUCROSE_VERSION needs to be manually incremented before release. See commits like 5d1837e3d9bf794801b14aa590e5a793265bd76a . It seems to be 0.99 at the moment, is that what it's supposed to be until we release 0.100? Yes. -- .. manuq .. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
I fixed distcheck for all the sugar modules and the build infrastructure bits are in place. I'm just waiting for sysadmins to give the buildbot user permission to the downloads area then I will release 0.99.0. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
Here is how I made the release. We should put instructions somewhere in git at some point, but let's first try the process another couple of times, there might be improvements we can to make. * For each module (sugar, sugar-toolkit-gtk3, sugar-artwork, sugar-runner, sugar-datastore) bump the configure.ac version and create the release tag. * Wait for buildbot to complete the builds triggered by my pushes. * Manually compose the release email, pasting links from http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/module_name. It was pretty quick and painless. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
2013/6/27 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: Here is how I made the release. We should put instructions somewhere in git at some point, but let's first try the process another couple of times, there might be improvements we can to make. * For each module (sugar, sugar-toolkit-gtk3, sugar-artwork, sugar-runner, sugar-datastore) bump the configure.ac version and create the release tag. * Wait for buildbot to complete the builds triggered by my pushes. * Manually compose the release email, pasting links from http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/module_name. It was pretty quick and painless. Excellent! -- .. manuq .. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 26 June 2013 19:26, Thomas Gilliard satelli...@gmail.com wrote: Nightly compose: (Usually not usable for a period after release as they switch to f20) https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/ 0.99.1 is planned on July 31. Do you expect things will work by then? Yes, they'll be turned on very shortly. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: we was supposed to release 0.99.0 today but we have not tarballs to ship because the maintainers have been to busy to deal with that. I already brought this up when we came up with the 0.100 roadmap but let me try again. Assuming we find resources to release, who is going to test that code? I suspect no one is going to, which makes releasing a waste of precious maintainers time. There might not be a lot of testing, but some does happen. Here is one example: these unstable tarballs will be built in Fedora (thanks Peter) and then included in SoaS development builds, which are frequently tested by satellit. In the past such releases have also been shipped in OLPC development builds. Daniel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
On 26 June 2013 19:02, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: we was supposed to release 0.99.0 today but we have not tarballs to ship because the maintainers have been to busy to deal with that. I already brought this up when we came up with the 0.100 roadmap but let me try again. Assuming we find resources to release, who is going to test that code? I suspect no one is going to, which makes releasing a waste of precious maintainers time. There might not be a lot of testing, but some does happen. Here is one example: these unstable tarballs will be built in Fedora (thanks Peter) and then included in SoaS development builds, which are frequently tested by satellit. Thanks. I would appreciate pointers about SoaS development builds. How frequently they are built, what they are based on (F19/F20) etc. In the past such releases have also been shipped in OLPC development builds. Is OLPC going to do build this cycle? -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks. I would appreciate pointers about SoaS development builds. How frequently they are built, what they are based on (F19/F20) etc. I believe they are built automatically, on an almost-nightly basis, for the current development version of Fedora. That is F19 right now but will soon be F20. http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/ Is OLPC going to do build this cycle? We have not yet reached planning stages for the next release, but it is likely that someone will produce a couple of F20 developer-only images or something, to see where things are at. Daniel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
On 26 June 2013 19:16, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks. I would appreciate pointers about SoaS development builds. How frequently they are built, what they are based on (F19/F20) etc. I believe they are built automatically, on an almost-nightly basis, for the current development version of Fedora. That is F19 right now but will soon be F20. http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/ Nice, as soon as it's switched over to F20 that seems like a place where we could get some testing. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
On 26 June 2013 19:26, Thomas Gilliard satelli...@gmail.com wrote: Nightly compose: (Usually not usable for a period after release as they switch to f20) https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/ 0.99.1 is planned on July 31. Do you expect things will work by then? ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
If people are fine with that, I will try to make the 0.99.0 release myself, automating things a little, with the goal of reducing at a minimum the work involved. I'm not going to be able to write per module release notes and such, but I guess having the tarballs is better than nothing. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Unstable releases
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: If people are fine with that, I will try to make the 0.99.0 release myself, automating things a little, with the goal of reducing at a minimum the work involved. I'm not going to be able to write per module release notes and such, but I guess having the tarballs is better than nothing. Yes, no need for release notes. There is already a release script somewhere that makes the rest almost effortless - ask Manuel. Daniel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
