Yep! It should be pretty smooth. Is there anything windows-specific to do when we do a release?
If not, if it's ok for you and Doron, I'm fine with taking care of bumping the ABI revision (only, since there were no incompatible changes), finalizing the NEWS and pushing the tag in both repos. On Thu, 2016-06-16 at 18:55 +0200, Pieter Hintjens wrote: > Sounds good. Shall we make these pilots for the new release process? > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Luca Boccassi <luca.bocca...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > During the Brussels meetup/hackaday I backported Kevin's Github+Travis > > release to zerom4-1 and zeromq4-x. > > > > We have quite a few bug fixes queued up there since the last stable > > releases a year ago - shall we do a bugfix release for both? Those would > > be 4.1.5 and 4.0.8. > > > > Just to be sure, I've verified with abi-compliance-checker [1] that > > there was no ABI breakage with the respective stable versions. > > > > Kind regards, > > Luca Boccassi > > > > [1] https://github.com/lvc/abi-compliance-checker > > > > On Mon, 2016-05-09 at 13:36 +0200, Kevin Sapper wrote: > >> The deployment has a couple of constraints (see .travis.yml -> deploy: on: > >> <constraints>). > >> One constraint is the repo MUST be "zeromq/libzmq". If we port this to > >> zeromq4-x and zeromq4-1 > >> we need to adjust this or remove this constraint altogether. > >> > >> 2016-05-09 13:04 GMT+02:00 Luca Boccassi <luca.bocca...@gmail.com>: > >> > >> > Awesome, thanks! > >> > > >> > So now if we port this to zeromq4-x and zeromq4-1, we'll just have to > >> > push the tags corresponding to the last commit of each previous release, > >> > right? It might make moving all downloadable to Github a much easier > >> > process. > >> > > >> > On Mon, 2016-05-09 at 11:45 +0200, Kevin Sapper wrote: > >> > > On libzmq master it's now possible to let travis automatically deploy > >> > > artifacts. The deployment is triggered if a new tag is created. I've > >> > > created a test release and tag[1] to see if it is working properly. The > >> > > files that are available under this release have been deploy by travis. > >> > > > >> > > [1] https://github.com/zeromq/libzmq/releases/tag/v4.0.2-test > >> > > > >> > > 2016-05-04 11:34 GMT+02:00 Luca Boccassi <luca.bocca...@gmail.com>: > >> > > > >> > > > On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 05:46 +0200, Michal Vyskocil wrote: > >> > > > > Hi, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Just for a curiosity - the content of packaging/debian collide with > >> > > > > standard Debian packaging? It is intentionally there to not clash, > >> > > > > so > >> > > > maybe > >> > > > > solve this problem. Either by not generating them, either by > >> > > > > defying > >> > > > safer > >> > > > > location. > >> > > > > >> > > > It's not a problem with the location, it's just that the Debian > >> > > > source > >> > > > package will end up having packaging stuff duplicated and with > >> > different > >> > > > content: 2 changelogs, 2 control files, etc. > >> > > > > >> > > > But again this is exactly why make dist exists - having that > >> > > > generated > >> > > > packaging code in the repository is useful, no need to remove it. > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, 2016-05-03 at 18:26 +0200, Pieter Hintjens wrote: > >> > > > > > One note, 'make dist' always fails the first few times because > >> > files > >> > > > > > are missing. Keep this in mind. The git tarball has the great > >> > > > > > advantage of never failing. (And since it makes tarballs look > >> > > > > > like > >> > git > >> > > > > > clones it gives the same experience to all developers.) > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > I'd vote for killing 'make dist'. It also makes us dependent on > >> > > > autotools. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Uhm I just tried fresh clones of both libzmq and zeromq4-1, > >> > > > > and ./autogen.sh; ./configure; make dist works just fine. > >> > > > > It was broken a while ago, but I fixed it, and now the CI tests > >> > > > > that > >> > it > >> > > > > works. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Besides, IMHO there are 2 big problems with just tarring up the git > >> > > > > repo. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > First of all, it doesn't remove the dependency, it just moves it > >> > down to > >> > > > > the user. Which means we'll start getting bug reports that are due > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > the different versions of autotools or cmake used (and there are a > >> > lot! > >> > > > > ). > >> > > > > > >> > > > > But most importantly, the tarball will ship stuff that shouldn't be > >> > > > > shipped, which is a huge problem for distribution packagers. For > >> > > > > example, in CZMQ, the packaging bit would be shipped. That would > >> > break > >> > > > > many things in the package build process, and the distro maintainer > >> > (ie: > >> > > > > me :-) ) would have to take the shipped tarball and sanitize it, > >> > nuking > >> > > > > all extraneous bits. This should not be necessary! That's exactly > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > reason "make dist" exists. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Pieter Hintjens <p...@imatix.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > > > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Luca Boccassi < > >> > > > luca.bocca...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Is any of the API I marked as draft actually ready for > >> > > > > > >> release? > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Even so, leave it 'draft' until it's actually being used. > >> > Changing > >> > > > > > > minds is expensive otherwise. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> So should we use branches instead for bugfix releases? > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > All fixes to master. In the extraordinary case where a bugfix > >> > release > >> > > > > > > cannot be made from master, a branch could work. We never > >> > > > > > > needed > >> > this > >> > > > > > > in e.g. CZMQ. I doubt we'd need it in libzmq. I absolutely > >> > recommend > >> > > > > > > against branches unless it's the only option. (And I think > >> > > > > > > we've > >> > > > > > > designed ourselves space to never need that option.) > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Isn't it possible to do the github release thing with the > >> > result of > >> > > > > > >> "make dist"? I think I've read somewhere that you can use the > >> > > > result of > >> > > > > > >> CI builds. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Seems Kevin has solved this, almost :) > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -Pieter > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > zeromq-dev mailing list > >> > > > > > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > >> > > > > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > zeromq-dev mailing list > >> > > > > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > >> > > > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > zeromq-dev mailing list > >> > > > > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > >> > > > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > zeromq-dev mailing list > >> > > > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > >> > > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > >> > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > zeromq-dev mailing list > >> > > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > >> > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > zeromq-dev mailing list > >> > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > >> > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> zeromq-dev mailing list > >> zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > >> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > zeromq-dev mailing list > > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
