On Wednesday 26 September 2007 10:10, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Stephan Richter wrote:
> > On Wednesday 26 September 2007 09:36, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> >> I think tagging things in svn is a minimal requirement, though. I
> >> understood that some of this stuff wasn't tagged?
> > I agree. And Roger simply forgot. As Marius pointed out, as we do more
> > releases, problems like this will occur frequently. Making mistakes is
> > human, so let's develop a tool that does some basic checking.
> I'm not yet convinced that we will have more releases. We have more
> releases now because we're trying to get to stable versions. After that,
> the eggs are on their own and I think we'll make much less releases.
I would not hold my breath on this one, but I have unsupported hope you are
> But even if we got more releases to do, I don't see the problem. With
> more releases we'd get more practice and make less mistakes.
This is logically incorrect. It is the same as saying: More guns make us
The error rate would have to drop by the same factor the releases are
increased, which I do not think will be the case, especially since more
people are doing releasing now.,
> One of the things we should realize in this process is that -- even
> though setuptools makes it so damn easy to register and uplaod stuff to
> PyPI -- releases are actually important business. They can't just be
> created in a jiffy. They require attention and concentration. And a
> well-defined process.
I agree. But all the process in the world will not drop the error rate to
zero. I think that Marius' tool suggestion is very good and I also think we
should seriously look at how Linux distributions manage that process. Having
some staging mechanism would be good.
CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training
Zope3-dev mailing list