rave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jasha Joachimsthal <j.joachimst...@onehippo.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Rave 0.10 Release Candidate
Date Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:10:56 GMT
On 9 April 2012 15:51, Franklin, Matthew B. <mfranklin@mitre.org> wrote:

>
> On 4/9/12 9:46 AM, "Raminderjeet Singh" <raminderjsingh@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >As the fix is already part of trunk and we did not create any branch so
> >what should i do to create build. Shall i create a tag 0.10.1 from trunk
> >and create the release. As the trunk pom's are already at 0.11-snaphot, i
> >need to careful not to update them again i release process.
>
> Since the fix is in place in trunk, IMO we no longer need to branch.  You
> could release 0.10.1 right now out of trunk without any need to change
> poms.  Just make sure you set the development version to 0.11-SNAPSHOT
> when prompted by the release plugin...
>

Should we create a 0.10.1 version in Jira as well?


>
> >
> >
> >Thanks
> >Raminder
> >
> >
> >On Apr 9, 2012, at 6:46 AM, Jasha Joachimsthal wrote:
> >
> >> Tested the portal and it works again. Thanks for fixing it.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 6 April 2012 20:37, Mahadevan, Venkat <venkatm@mitre.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Fixed the issue. Please let me know otherwise.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Venkat
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 4/6/12 9:19 AM, "Mahadevan, Venkat" <venkatm@mitre.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Jasha, I will work on RAVE-541 and fix the issue
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 4/6/12 6:26 AM, "Jasha Joachimsthal" <j.joachimsthal@onehippo.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 6 April 2012 10:46, Ate Douma <ate@douma.nu> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 04/06/2012 10:41 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I've got two remarks so far:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> a) This release candidate is dependent on the non-yet released
> >>>>>>> rave-master-0.10,
> >>>>>>> which I don't like much.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> IMO it would have been better to wait another day until
the
> >>>>>>> rave-master
> >>>>>>> was
> >>>>>>> formally released. Although the rave-master release most
certainly
> >>>>>>> will
> >>>>>>> commence, in theory if we find a last minute blocker issue
with it
> >>>>>>> causing its
> >>>>>>> release to be failed, it would cause *this* release candidate
then
> >>>>>>>to
> >>>>>>> fail
> >>>>>>> automatically as well...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> b) Issue RAVE-553 just reported by Jasha and also confirmed
by
> >>>>>>>myself
> >>>>>>> makes the
> >>>>>>> release useless for all practical use-cases and most certainly
> >>>>>>>should
> >>>>>>> have been
> >>>>>>> easily tested/found before the release. We should look into
> >>>>>>>improving
> >>>>>>> our
> >>>>>>> quality assurance and add some minimal but sensible (interaction)
> >>>>>>> testing
> >>>>>>> plan
> >>>>>>> which should pass before we cut a release candidate because
this is
> >>>>>>> quite
> >>>>>>> annoying.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For b) I'm inclined to vote -1 or at least -0. As I haven't
had
> >>>>>>>time
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> further
> >>>>>>> review I'll postpone casting my vote for now but it doesn't
look
> >>>>>>>rosy
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> me.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> BTW: just want to make clear, especially for Raminder, I consider
b)
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> the need for improving on our quality assurance a responsibility
of
> >>>>>>the
> >>>>>> team, including myself, not one of the release-manager who but
must
> >>>>>> execute
> >>>>>> and ascertain this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If I revert the commit in
> >>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-541
> >>>>> I
> >>>>> can create new users again. I don't know what the intention of this
> >>>>> feature
> >>>>> was, but the result is that it creates a new PROFILE page instead
of
> >>>>>a
> >>>>> new
> >>>>> USER page. The portal cannot handle a user without a user page.
The
> >>>>> portal
> >>>>> can however render a profile page if no profile page is present
yet
> >>>>>for
> >>>>> that user.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We have multiple options:
> >>>>> 0. accept the 0.10 release, but I also doubt between -0 and -1
> >>>>> 1. reject the 0.10 release, fix or revert the issue, no new release
> >>>>>until
> >>>>> the end of the month
> >>>>> 2. reject the 0.10 release, revert the commit done for RAVE-541
and
> >>>>> create
> >>>>> a new 0.10.1 release after the rave-master pom has been released
> >>>>> 3. reject the 0.10 release, fix the RAVE-541 issue and create a
new
> >>>>> 0.10.1
> >>>>> release after the rave-master pom has been released
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For option 2 & 3 we don't want other new features in the 0.10.1
> >>>>>release
> >>>>> so
> >>>>> either
> >>>>> a. hold all commits until the issue RAVE-541 has been resolved or
> >>>>> reverted.
> >>>>> Create a release from trunk (0.11-SNAPSHOT -> 0.10.1 ->
> >>>>>0.11-SNAPSHOT)
> >>>>> b. create a branch from 0.10 tag (0.10.1-SNAPSHOT), fix or revert
> >>>>> RAVE-541,
> >>>>> release from the branch (0.10.1-SNAPSHOT -> 0.10.1 ->
> >>>>>0.10.2-SNAPSHOT).
> >>>>> Merge the fix into trunk (0.11-SNAPSHOT)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> @Venkat (or whoever can fix the issue and knows what the intention
> >>>>>was):
> >>>>> in
> >>>>> case we want a 0.10.1 release, do you think you can fix this issue
> >>>>>soon,
> >>>>> shall we first revert your commit and give you more time to solve
it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jasha
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ate
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 04/06/2012 02:51 AM, Raminderjeet Singh wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This is discussion thread for vote on Apache Rave Project
0.10
> >>>>>>>> Release
> >>>>>>>> Candidate
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> For more information on the release process, checkout
-
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> http://rave.apache.org/**release-management.html<
> >>> http://rave.apache.or
> >>>>>>>> g
> >>>>>>>> /release-management.html>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Some of the things to check before voting are:
> >>>>>>>> - can you run the demo binaries
> >>>>>>>> - can you build the contents of source-release.zip and
svn tag
> >>>>>>>> - do all of the staged jars/zips contain the required
LICENSE,
> >>>>>>>>NOTICE
> >>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>> DISCLAIMER files
> >>>>>>>> - are all of the staged jars signed and the signature
verifiable
> >>>>>>>> - is the signing key in the project's KEYS file and
on a public
> >>>>>>>> server
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message