You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@netbeans.apache.org by Eric Barboni <sk...@apache.org> on 2020/03/02 10:37:12 UTC
proposition on release preparation process and vote
Hi folks,
I wonder if we can change the release process in the following way:
For each Vote candidate:
Synchronization of all bits (of course sources are mandatory) maven
artefacts, installers (certified)
--
A vote with everything inside with asking after normal check
(licence+checksum) for example which installer on which os.
If source is wrong because of license, vote will be cancelled so we have to
regenerate everything. Was done for 11.3 not a big deal just time until we
got a fix.
If everything in source is ok, then will go for normal tally with one PMC
vote per installer minimum. If I analyze on 11.3 it's only +1 or +0. So if
11.3 vc1 license has been ok we would have save 72h.
We lost a certification per non valid voting candidate (not sure how much it
cost)
If tally conduct to a release with an installer weird, if tally cover, just
release. And fix only the wrong installer.
Best Regards
Eric
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
RE: proposition on release preparation process and vote
Posted by Eric Barboni <sk...@apache.org>.
In the case of an all in one vote we may ask to that PMC to check installer in an os and we ensure the 3 are covered
Minimum voting is 3 PMC if the three cover each OS (PMC are not supposed to get all 3 OS )
On the 3 installer vote you need for a particular OS 3 PMC with that particular OS.
This is more demanding. (9 people with same rule as above to get all the installer)
Best Regards
Eric
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Neil C Smith <ne...@apache.org>
Envoyé : lundi 2 mars 2020 18:49
À : dev <de...@netbeans.apache.org>
Objet : Re: proposition on release preparation process and vote
On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 17:28, Eric Barboni <sk...@apache.org> wrote:
> Well we vote 72h for sources (+maven + binaries) in one go.
> We vote for another 72h for installers.
> That's 144h until release announcement.
There's no reason they can't be concurrent, though. 11.2 votes overlapped. Just if source vote fails they all fail.
Multiple threads are good - they have their own timescale, different people can initiate them, make it easier to see if votes needed, and if one installer is behind on votes it only holds itself up.
Best wishes,
Neil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
Re: proposition on release preparation process and vote
Posted by Neil C Smith <ne...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 17:28, Eric Barboni <sk...@apache.org> wrote:
> Well we vote 72h for sources (+maven + binaries) in one go.
> We vote for another 72h for installers.
> That's 144h until release announcement.
There's no reason they can't be concurrent, though. 11.2 votes
overlapped. Just if source vote fails they all fail.
Multiple threads are good - they have their own timescale, different
people can initiate them, make it easier to see if votes needed, and
if one installer is behind on votes it only holds itself up.
Best wishes,
Neil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
RE: proposition on release preparation process and vote
Posted by Eric Barboni <sk...@apache.org>.
Well we vote 72h for sources (+maven + binaries) in one go.
We vote for another 72h for installers.
That's 144h until release announcement.
Except the sources not well done leading to vote cancellation. (LICENSE / NOTICE issue)
the rest is tally. If an installer does'nt work (for a particular os jdk ) we don’t care and it can be released in the all package if tally is major +1.
That's 72h until release announcement.
Best Regards
Eric
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Neil C Smith <ne...@apache.org>
Envoyé : lundi 2 mars 2020 18:01
À : dev <de...@netbeans.apache.org>
Objet : Re: proposition on release preparation process and vote
On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 10:37, Eric Barboni <sk...@apache.org> wrote:
> A vote with everything inside with asking after normal check
> (licence+checksum) for example which installer on which os.
I'm slightly confused what you're suggesting? But if it's one vote thread for everything, including installers, then definitely -1.
Otherwise, I don't see what's different to what we've already been doing?!
Best wishes,
Neil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
Re: proposition on release preparation process and vote
Posted by Neil C Smith <ne...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 10:37, Eric Barboni <sk...@apache.org> wrote:
> A vote with everything inside with asking after normal check
> (licence+checksum) for example which installer on which os.
I'm slightly confused what you're suggesting? But if it's one vote
thread for everything, including installers, then definitely -1.
Otherwise, I don't see what's different to what we've already been
doing?!
Best wishes,
Neil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
Re: proposition on release preparation process and vote
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@apache.org>.
Agree too.
Gj
On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 17:38, Patrick Musembi <pa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1 Eric for this proposition.
>
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2020, 13:37 Eric Barboni <sk...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I wonder if we can change the release process in the following way:
> >
> > For each Vote candidate:
> > Synchronization of all bits (of course sources are mandatory) maven
> > artefacts, installers (certified)
> > --
> > A vote with everything inside with asking after normal check
> > (licence+checksum) for example which installer on which os.
> >
> > If source is wrong because of license, vote will be cancelled so we have
> to
> > regenerate everything. Was done for 11.3 not a big deal just time until
> we
> > got a fix.
> >
> > If everything in source is ok, then will go for normal tally with one PMC
> > vote per installer minimum. If I analyze on 11.3 it's only +1 or +0. So
> if
> > 11.3 vc1 license has been ok we would have save 72h.
> >
> > We lost a certification per non valid voting candidate (not sure how much
> > it
> > cost)
> >
> > If tally conduct to a release with an installer weird, if tally cover,
> just
> > release. And fix only the wrong installer.
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Eric
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.apache.org
> >
> > For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: proposition on release preparation process and vote
Posted by Patrick Musembi <pa...@gmail.com>.
+1 Eric for this proposition.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2020, 13:37 Eric Barboni <sk...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I wonder if we can change the release process in the following way:
>
> For each Vote candidate:
> Synchronization of all bits (of course sources are mandatory) maven
> artefacts, installers (certified)
> --
> A vote with everything inside with asking after normal check
> (licence+checksum) for example which installer on which os.
>
> If source is wrong because of license, vote will be cancelled so we have to
> regenerate everything. Was done for 11.3 not a big deal just time until we
> got a fix.
>
> If everything in source is ok, then will go for normal tally with one PMC
> vote per installer minimum. If I analyze on 11.3 it's only +1 or +0. So if
> 11.3 vc1 license has been ok we would have save 72h.
>
> We lost a certification per non valid voting candidate (not sure how much
> it
> cost)
>
> If tally conduct to a release with an installer weird, if tally cover, just
> release. And fix only the wrong installer.
>
> Best Regards
> Eric
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.apache.org
>
> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>
>
>
>