If you run into any trouble with the automatic travis release feel free to ping me via twitter or mail. Am 16.06.2016 9:31 nachm. schrieb "Luca Boccassi" <luca.bocca...@gmail.com>:
> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
