You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by rb...@covalent.net on 2001/02/10 01:03:19 UTC
Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
This is just a quick heads up. I will be tagging and rolling again
tomorrow sometime, assuming the server compiles and runs on BeOS. David
has told me his is looking at it now, so if he gives the thumbs up, we
will tag and roll tomorrow. The script for rolling has been checked in to
httpd-site, but it still needs some work, I will keep updating it as we
use it.
If there are any other platforms that we already know don't work, please
tell me know so that I don't waste my time rolling tomorrow.
Thanks,
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
On Sat, 10 Feb 2001, Greg Stein wrote:
> Cool enough with me. I was assuming you had it down pat to a single command
> to be a no-brainer.
It's not going to be a single command for a while. The tag is still
separate from the roll, and I haven't tried to get the signing process
into the script yet. I'm taking this kind of slowly, so that debugging
this is easier.
> I'll see about trying my hand at it next week. It'll probably take me an
> hour, but being a first time, it will be a good debug of the process that
> you're setting up for us.
I would prefer to do this myself until I have the process down, and I can
update the "rolling the tarball" page on dev. If I finish before next
week, cool and you can do the tag and roll. If not, then I would
appreciate it if you would wait until it is a single command, so that you
don't waste time debugging my stuff, and I don't have to be "on call" to
answer questions.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
Cool enough with me. I was assuming you had it down pat to a single command
to be a no-brainer.
I'll see about trying my hand at it next week. It'll probably take me an
hour, but being a first time, it will be a good debug of the process that
you're setting up for us.
Cheers,
-g
On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 08:45:49PM -0800, rbb@covalent.net wrote:
>
> > > From: <rb...@covalent.net>
> > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 6:03 PM
> > >
> > > > This is just a quick heads up. I will be tagging and rolling again
> > > > tomorrow sometime, assuming the server compiles and runs on BeOS. David
> >
> > Why not tag and roll, despite BeOS? A lot of people can still test any
> > tarball that is provided. Sure, we won't call it "alpha" or "beta" quality,
> > but that doesn't mean it should be totally ignored by everybody.
>
> Because that is a waste of my time. I already did that once today, but I
> didn't publish the tarballs, because I learned that BeOS didn't work.
>
> > > > has told me his is looking at it now, so if he gives the thumbs up, we
> > > > will tag and roll tomorrow. The script for rolling has been checked in to
> > > > httpd-site, but it still needs some work, I will keep updating it as we
> > > > use it.
> > > >
> > > > If there are any other platforms that we already know don't work, please
> > > > tell me know so that I don't waste my time rolling tomorrow.
> >
> > The whole point is that it shouldn't be a time waster :-) If we can get the
> > process to "type these few commands; while waiting, go read email", then
> > we're all set, and it doesn't matter how good or broken the tarball is.
>
> Regardless of how many commands it is, it is still a time waster. Even if
> the computer itself does all the work, it takes about a half hour to get
> it all done. That is a half-hour I would rather not spend if I don't have
> too.
>
> Ryan
>
> _______________________________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> 406 29th St.
> San Francisco, CA 94131
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
rbb@covalent.net wrote:
>
> It's funny, that's how I originally read it too, but when I
> said that, I was told I was wrong, that every tag was also a roll.
> Oh well.
Maybe that is true -- if the tagging is being done by the
RM. But tags can label points in the evolution without
being tied to a tarball.
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar <http://Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Software Foundation <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Apache-Server.Com/>
"Apache Server Unleashed" <http://ApacheUnleashed.Com/>
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
> Back to rbb:
> > Roy's model also has the tag and roll being a simple thing
>
> Not entirely. It seems very clear to me that he has
> made a point of separating the two. Tagging can happen
> at any time when things seem sane; rolling may or may not
> happen at the same time. Maybe I have missed something, but
> is not the only non-simple aspect of your script the signing
> part? We do not need to sign a tarball that is not a release,
> and not every tarball is a release. As Roy remarks,
It's funny, that's how I originally read it too, but when I said that, I
was told I was wrong, that every tag was also a roll. Oh well.
The script has been written, and it seems to work well.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
rbb@covalent.net wrote:
>
> According to what Roy has said in the past, it is to roll when the RM
> believes everything is working.
He sez:
> My intention was to tag the tree whenever some real person felt
> that it was worth tagging.
and
> Like I said, we can do this because, if it turns out we were unlucky
> and the tag point does not correspond to a stable tree state, then
> we just don't release that version.
Back to rbb:
> Roy's model also has the tag and roll being a simple thing
Not entirely. It seems very clear to me that he has
made a point of separating the two. Tagging can happen
at any time when things seem sane; rolling may or may not
happen at the same time. Maybe I have missed something, but
is not the only non-simple aspect of your script the signing
part? We do not need to sign a tarball that is not a release,
and not every tarball is a release. As Roy remarks,
> Yes, which is why the main change is social, not technical -- we have
> to stop treating every build version as if it were a release version.
> We simply cannot know that until after the build is tested.
As I understand it, anyone may tag, and anyone may roll,
and the RM's basic function is to coordinate which tarballs
will be released.
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar <http://Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Software Foundation <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Apache-Server.Com/>
"Apache Server Unleashed" <http://ApacheUnleashed.Com/>
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
On Sat, 10 Feb 2001, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
> >
> > Why not tag and roll, despite BeOS? A lot of people can still
> > test any tarball that is provided.
>
> Indeed; that is what I understood to be one of the points
> Roy was trying to make. Rolling happens at relatively
> quiet points in the development (i.e., when not a lot of
> commits are happening), not when everything works.
According to what Roy has said in the past, it is to roll when the RM
believes everything is working. Roy's model also has the tag and roll
being a simple thing, which although the script makes it easier, it isn't
quite simple yet. Until this is a single command, rolling every week is
still time consuming. We are making progress on being able to roll
quickly and easily, but we aren't there just yet. Roy's model depends on
that working before anything else.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
Greg Stein wrote:
>
> Why not tag and roll, despite BeOS? A lot of people can still
> test any tarball that is provided.
Indeed; that is what I understood to be one of the points
Roy was trying to make. Rolling happens at relatively
quiet points in the development (i.e., when not a lot of
commits are happening), not when everything works.
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar <http://Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Software Foundation <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Apache-Server.Com/>
"Apache Server Unleashed" <http://ApacheUnleashed.Com/>
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by Peter Moore <pe...@cdws.com.au>.
>Yup. You grab the STATUS file, look in there to see (for example) "2.0.7 was
>released as beta1" and you fetch by that tag. 2.0.0 thru 2.0.6 could be
>noted as unreleased or not even noted :-)
Cool. i'll check that a lot more than i have been.
>
>We have ample mechanisms to describe the quality of specific tags, and to
>record what was released, when. All that info does not have to go into each
>tag.
>
>In fact, I would state that it is *preferable* to not encode the date or the
>quality in the tag.
Totally agree.
>I can write an automated script to do a comparison
>between APACHE_2_0_1 and APACHE_2_0_2. If you put a date in there, then I'm
>screwed. I have to know the dates of each of those releases, and append that
>date onto the tag name. Coming back later and appending quality labels to
>the tag doesn't help either.
Release numbers are sufficient and preferable.
>
>Humans can use STATUS to get their data. Computers can use the tag if it has
>a rigorous, simple format.
>
>Cheers,
>-g
>
cheers
peter
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
Yup. You grab the STATUS file, look in there to see (for example) "2.0.7 was
released as beta1" and you fetch by that tag. 2.0.0 thru 2.0.6 could be
noted as unreleased or not even noted :-)
We have ample mechanisms to describe the quality of specific tags, and to
record what was released, when. All that info does not have to go into each
tag.
In fact, I would state that it is *preferable* to not encode the date or the
quality in the tag. I can write an automated script to do a comparison
between APACHE_2_0_1 and APACHE_2_0_2. If you put a date in there, then I'm
screwed. I have to know the dates of each of those releases, and append that
date onto the tag name. Coming back later and appending quality labels to
the tag doesn't help either.
Humans can use STATUS to get their data. Computers can use the tag if it has
a rigorous, simple format.
Cheers,
-g
On Sat, Feb 10, 2001 at 01:23:10PM +1100, Peter Moore wrote:
> i think if you tag and roll "despite BeOS" that's fine as long as you have
> note a somewhere advising that the "tag xyz is known not to work on BeOS".
>
> i get my source updates for BeOS using cvs update-dP anyway so i am not
> checking out via a tag although in future it will be good to be able to check
> out via a known working tag
> cheers
> peter
> ********************************************
> Peter Moore
> Director
> CDWS
> peter@cdws.com.au
> http://www.cdws.com.au/
>
> Mobile +61 4 111 86230 (in Aus 04 111 86230)
> ICQ 926967 (old) 95022055 (new - Oct 18, 2000)
> ********************************************
> >On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 06:07:20PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >> From: <rb...@covalent.net>
> >> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 6:03 PM
> >>
> >> > This is just a quick heads up. I will be tagging and rolling again
> >> > tomorrow sometime, assuming the server compiles and runs on BeOS. David
> >
> >Why not tag and roll, despite BeOS? A lot of people can still test any
> >tarball that is provided. Sure, we won't call it "alpha" or "beta" quality,
> >but that doesn't mean it should be totally ignored by everybody.
> >
> >> > has told me his is looking at it now, so if he gives the thumbs up, we
> >> > will tag and roll tomorrow. The script for rolling has been checked in
> >to
> >> > httpd-site, but it still needs some work, I will keep updating it as we
> >> > use it.
> >> >
> >> > If there are any other platforms that we already know don't work, please
> >> > tell me know so that I don't waste my time rolling tomorrow.
> >
> >The whole point is that it shouldn't be a time waster :-) If we can get the
> >process to "type these few commands; while waiting, go read email", then
> >we're all set, and it doesn't matter how good or broken the tarball is.
> >
> >> I will be building and testing apache-2.0/win32 tonight.
> >>
> >> Please assure our Announcement contains the usual disclaimer that the beta
> >1
> >> has not yet been optimized for performance, and that the beta cycles will
> >> continue to see improvements in performance and reliability.
> >
> >We don't know if it is beta. That comes later.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >-g
> >
> >--
> >Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
> >
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by Peter Moore <pe...@cdws.com.au>.
i think if you tag and roll "despite BeOS" that's fine as long as you have
note a somewhere advising that the "tag xyz is known not to work on BeOS".
i get my source updates for BeOS using cvs update-dP anyway so i am not
checking out via a tag although in future it will be good to be able to check
out via a known working tag
cheers
peter
********************************************
Peter Moore
Director
CDWS
peter@cdws.com.au
http://www.cdws.com.au/
Mobile +61 4 111 86230 (in Aus 04 111 86230)
ICQ 926967 (old) 95022055 (new - Oct 18, 2000)
********************************************
>On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 06:07:20PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> From: <rb...@covalent.net>
>> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 6:03 PM
>>
>> > This is just a quick heads up. I will be tagging and rolling again
>> > tomorrow sometime, assuming the server compiles and runs on BeOS. David
>
>Why not tag and roll, despite BeOS? A lot of people can still test any
>tarball that is provided. Sure, we won't call it "alpha" or "beta" quality,
>but that doesn't mean it should be totally ignored by everybody.
>
>> > has told me his is looking at it now, so if he gives the thumbs up, we
>> > will tag and roll tomorrow. The script for rolling has been checked in
>to
>> > httpd-site, but it still needs some work, I will keep updating it as we
>> > use it.
>> >
>> > If there are any other platforms that we already know don't work, please
>> > tell me know so that I don't waste my time rolling tomorrow.
>
>The whole point is that it shouldn't be a time waster :-) If we can get the
>process to "type these few commands; while waiting, go read email", then
>we're all set, and it doesn't matter how good or broken the tarball is.
>
>> I will be building and testing apache-2.0/win32 tonight.
>>
>> Please assure our Announcement contains the usual disclaimer that the beta
>1
>> has not yet been optimized for performance, and that the beta cycles will
>> continue to see improvements in performance and reliability.
>
>We don't know if it is beta. That comes later.
>
>Cheers,
>-g
>
>--
>Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
>
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by David Reid <dr...@jetnet.co.uk>.
In fact as soon as I have BeOS working again I'm more than willing to take a
crack at rolling a tarball...
First things first though... :)
david
----- Original Message -----
From: <rb...@covalent.net>
To: <ne...@apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 11:56 PM
Subject: Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
> On Sat, 10 Feb 2001, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>
> > rbb@covalent.net wrote:
> > >
> > > > Why not tag and roll, despite BeOS?
> > >
> > > Because that is a waste of my time.
> >
> > So fine, there is no reason any other developer cannot do
> > it when the mood strikes. You do not have to be the only one
> > doing it.
>
> And I never said I did. I said I would tag and roll today, which doesn't
> mean nobody else can. I said that I wouldn't tag and roll unless BeOS was
> working, because that is a waste of my time. Again, I never said nobody
> else could, I said it was a waste of _my_ time, so I didn't want to do it.
>
> As it happens, I have from David Reid that there is currently a bug in
> BeOS's fork function, so the server doesn't work, and it is unlikely to be
> fixed quickly. For that reason, I will be tagging and rolling tonight
> sometime.
>
> Ryan
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
___
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> 406 29th St.
> San Francisco, CA 94131
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>
>
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
On Sat, 10 Feb 2001, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> rbb@covalent.net wrote:
> >
> > > Why not tag and roll, despite BeOS?
> >
> > Because that is a waste of my time.
>
> So fine, there is no reason any other developer cannot do
> it when the mood strikes. You do not have to be the only one
> doing it.
And I never said I did. I said I would tag and roll today, which doesn't
mean nobody else can. I said that I wouldn't tag and roll unless BeOS was
working, because that is a waste of my time. Again, I never said nobody
else could, I said it was a waste of _my_ time, so I didn't want to do it.
As it happens, I have from David Reid that there is currently a bug in
BeOS's fork function, so the server doesn't work, and it is unlikely to be
fixed quickly. For that reason, I will be tagging and rolling tonight
sometime.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
rbb@covalent.net wrote:
>
> > Why not tag and roll, despite BeOS?
>
> Because that is a waste of my time.
So fine, there is no reason any other developer cannot do
it when the mood strikes. You do not have to be the only one
doing it.
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar <http://Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Software Foundation <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Apache-Server.Com/>
"Apache Server Unleashed" <http://ApacheUnleashed.Com/>
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
> > From: <rb...@covalent.net>
> > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 6:03 PM
> >
> > > This is just a quick heads up. I will be tagging and rolling again
> > > tomorrow sometime, assuming the server compiles and runs on BeOS. David
>
> Why not tag and roll, despite BeOS? A lot of people can still test any
> tarball that is provided. Sure, we won't call it "alpha" or "beta" quality,
> but that doesn't mean it should be totally ignored by everybody.
Because that is a waste of my time. I already did that once today, but I
didn't publish the tarballs, because I learned that BeOS didn't work.
> > > has told me his is looking at it now, so if he gives the thumbs up, we
> > > will tag and roll tomorrow. The script for rolling has been checked in to
> > > httpd-site, but it still needs some work, I will keep updating it as we
> > > use it.
> > >
> > > If there are any other platforms that we already know don't work, please
> > > tell me know so that I don't waste my time rolling tomorrow.
>
> The whole point is that it shouldn't be a time waster :-) If we can get the
> process to "type these few commands; while waiting, go read email", then
> we're all set, and it doesn't matter how good or broken the tarball is.
Regardless of how many commands it is, it is still a time waster. Even if
the computer itself does all the work, it takes about a half hour to get
it all done. That is a half-hour I would rather not spend if I don't have
too.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 06:07:20PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> From: <rb...@covalent.net>
> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 6:03 PM
>
> > This is just a quick heads up. I will be tagging and rolling again
> > tomorrow sometime, assuming the server compiles and runs on BeOS. David
Why not tag and roll, despite BeOS? A lot of people can still test any
tarball that is provided. Sure, we won't call it "alpha" or "beta" quality,
but that doesn't mean it should be totally ignored by everybody.
> > has told me his is looking at it now, so if he gives the thumbs up, we
> > will tag and roll tomorrow. The script for rolling has been checked in to
> > httpd-site, but it still needs some work, I will keep updating it as we
> > use it.
> >
> > If there are any other platforms that we already know don't work, please
> > tell me know so that I don't waste my time rolling tomorrow.
The whole point is that it shouldn't be a time waster :-) If we can get the
process to "type these few commands; while waiting, go read email", then
we're all set, and it doesn't matter how good or broken the tarball is.
> I will be building and testing apache-2.0/win32 tonight.
>
> Please assure our Announcement contains the usual disclaimer that the beta 1
> has not yet been optimized for performance, and that the beta cycles will
> continue to see improvements in performance and reliability.
We don't know if it is beta. That comes later.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
> I will be building and testing apache-2.0/win32 tonight.
>
> Please assure our Announcement contains the usual disclaimer that the beta 1
> has not yet been optimized for performance, and that the beta cycles will
> continue to see improvements in performance and reliability.
Our Announcement is in httpd-site, so feel free to checkout it out and
make any changes you want to. :-)
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Rolling tomorrow, conditionally.
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
From: <rb...@covalent.net>
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 6:03 PM
> This is just a quick heads up. I will be tagging and rolling again
> tomorrow sometime, assuming the server compiles and runs on BeOS. David
> has told me his is looking at it now, so if he gives the thumbs up, we
> will tag and roll tomorrow. The script for rolling has been checked in to
> httpd-site, but it still needs some work, I will keep updating it as we
> use it.
>
> If there are any other platforms that we already know don't work, please
> tell me know so that I don't waste my time rolling tomorrow.
I will be building and testing apache-2.0/win32 tonight.
Please assure our Announcement contains the usual disclaimer that the beta 1
has not yet been optimized for performance, and that the beta cycles will
continue to see improvements in performance and reliability.
Bill