You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com> on 2006/09/09 10:46:35 UTC
Release Review (was: Incubator September Report)
On this topic... I've been looking at the release stuff and decided
to just go for it...
For this initial RC1 for version 4.0.0 I decided to go with the tag
route and we'll do a branch later when we're ready to do a final
release. The "tag" in this case is just an svn "soft" tag, ie the
implicit tag from the revision number (see the REVISION) file in the
archive. A real tag in SVN is pretty much the same as a branch and I
think is a little heavier than what we need for this.
Before moving on to the next step we need to review this among
ourselves. Here is a list of things that I can think of that we need
review in this:
1. test un-archive and run as-is (should only require JDK installed)
2. identify and show-stopper bugs that we should fix before a real RC
3. check all ASF required files (NOTICE, LICENSE, KEYS, etc) and headers
4. check PGP and MD5 files
5. anything else?
Anyone who feels comfortable looking at these things, please do and
comment as needed!
The files are posted for initial review as attachments on the
docs.ofbiz.org site to this page:
http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/wAE
Thanks in to everyone for your help getting to this point, and of
course your help reviewing this so we can move to the next step!
-David
On Sep 8, 2006, at 11:39 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
> I've prepared a draft of the Incubator September report here:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2006
>
> The next OFBiz report will be due in December... do you think it is
> possible to try to graduate before that date? Who can help to wrap
> up the release candidate of OFBiz (that is the very last task we
> have to complete, even if it is not a mandatory task)?
>
> Jacopo
>
>
Re: Release Review
Posted by David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>.
Great, thanks for checking those Jacques.
-David
On Sep 14, 2006, at 4:55 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> md5 and signature are ok too for the zip
>
> Jacques
>
>>
>> On Sep 14, 2006, at 12:00 AM, Christian Geisert wrote:
>>
>>> David E Jones schrieb:
>>>> Thanks for testing these Christian.
>>>> Hmmm... I just tried the archives and such locally and they seem
>>>> to be fine. Perhaps something happened in the download?
>>>
>>>> To hopefully help things I just copied the files over to
>>>> people.apache.org, so they are available as below.
>>>
>>> This looks good, md5 and signature are ok for the tgz.
>>
>> That's good news Christian. Thanks for trying this other location.
>>
>> -David
Re: Release Review
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
md5 and signature are ok too for the zip
Jacques
>
> On Sep 14, 2006, at 12:00 AM, Christian Geisert wrote:
>
> > David E Jones schrieb:
> >> Thanks for testing these Christian.
> >> Hmmm... I just tried the archives and such locally and they seem
> >> to be fine. Perhaps something happened in the download?
> >
> >> To hopefully help things I just copied the files over to
> >> people.apache.org, so they are available as below.
> >
> > This looks good, md5 and signature are ok for the tgz.
>
> That's good news Christian. Thanks for trying this other location.
>
> -David
Re: OFBiz 4.x/5.0
Posted by David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>.
On Sep 14, 2006, at 3:15 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
> I suppose I just need the answer to a few of
> questions.
> 1) Is the release that RC1 is for going to be
> officially 4.0?
Please see my answers to Christian Geisert's questions about this
topic. They were on this list in the last couple of days.
> 2) What is the distinction that the Apache Ofbiz
> community would want to take between a .X release
> point and a X.0 release point?
I think we'll just have 3 dot-separated numbers, ie 4.0.0. The last
number would be for multiple releases in a single branch. In other
words 4.0.0 is the first release in the 4.0 branch, and 4.0.1 is the
second in that branch, and so on. 4.1 would be a separate branch and
incrementing this second number would be for more minor changes. If
we get to a big milestone or do a big change, we'd change the first
number.
This is how we've planned to do it in the past, and a fairly common
version numbering system that is pretty well understood.
> 3) When a decent road map feature set is voted on is
> using subtasks in Jira preferred or the "Affects
> Version" field?
The Affects Version field is more for bug fixes of a branch versus
the trunk (the SVN "version"). If a bug is reported in 4.0.1, for
example, we might see if it also exists in the trunk but the bug
report is for that version.
For now let's not put high level and proposed features in Jira until
thy have concrete support behind them. Otherwise we just end up with
a confusing mess... In other words I think it would work better to
have planning done in Confluence pages, and then specific tasks (once
actionable...) put into Jira and referred to from there. This is
early thought on this topic (ie just a proposal) and I know we
haven't discussed, so feedback and other ideas would be great.
-David
> 4) Who else is interested in actively participating in
> this?
>
>
> --- David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sep 14, 2006, at 2:57 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
>>
>>> --- David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm not at all opposed to an effort to try to
>> create
>>>> such a thing. Is
>>>> this something you would be interested in doing
>>>> Chris?
>>>
>>> That's something I would be very much interested
>> in
>>> doing/maintaining/ collaborating in.
>>
>> Great! What do you need to get started?
>>
>> As for a place to put the results, perhaps a page in
>> the wiki (OFBIZ)
>> part of docs.ofbiz.org would be the best.
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>
Re: OFBiz 4.x/5.0
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
From: "Chris Howe" <cj...@yahoo.com>
> 4) Who else is interested in actively participating in
> this?
I am (and hope to find time)
Jacques
>
>
> --- David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sep 14, 2006, at 2:57 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
> >
> > > --- David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I'm not at all opposed to an effort to try to
> > create
> > >> such a thing. Is
> > >> this something you would be interested in doing
> > >> Chris?
> > >
> > > That's something I would be very much interested
> > in
> > > doing/maintaining/ collaborating in.
> >
> > Great! What do you need to get started?
> >
> > As for a place to put the results, perhaps a page in
> > the wiki (OFBIZ)
> > part of docs.ofbiz.org would be the best.
> >
> > -David
> >
> >
Re: OFBiz 4.x/5.0
Posted by Tim Ruppert <ti...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
I'm more than happy to lend some time to this as having a goal probably
isn't going to hurt.
If you'll coordinate - please let me know where I can be of service.
Cheers,
Tim
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6595
Chris Howe wrote:
> I suppose I just need the answer to a few of
> questions.
> 1) Is the release that RC1 is for going to be
> officially 4.0?
> 2) What is the distinction that the Apache Ofbiz
> community would want to take between a .X release
> point and a X.0 release point?
> 3) When a decent road map feature set is voted on is
> using subtasks in Jira preferred or the "Affects
> Version" field?
> 4) Who else is interested in actively participating in
> this?
>
>
> --- David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 14, 2006, at 2:57 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
>>
>>
>>> --- David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I'm not at all opposed to an effort to try to
>>>>
>> create
>>
>>>> such a thing. Is
>>>> this something you would be interested in doing
>>>> Chris?
>>>>
>>> That's something I would be very much interested
>>>
>> in
>>
>>> doing/maintaining/ collaborating in.
>>>
>> Great! What do you need to get started?
>>
>> As for a place to put the results, perhaps a page in
>> the wiki (OFBIZ)
>> part of docs.ofbiz.org would be the best.
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>>
Re: OFBiz 4.x/5.0
Posted by Chris Howe <cj...@yahoo.com>.
I suppose I just need the answer to a few of
questions.
1) Is the release that RC1 is for going to be
officially 4.0?
2) What is the distinction that the Apache Ofbiz
community would want to take between a .X release
point and a X.0 release point?
3) When a decent road map feature set is voted on is
using subtasks in Jira preferred or the "Affects
Version" field?
4) Who else is interested in actively participating in
this?
--- David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>
wrote:
>
> On Sep 14, 2006, at 2:57 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
>
> > --- David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not at all opposed to an effort to try to
> create
> >> such a thing. Is
> >> this something you would be interested in doing
> >> Chris?
> >
> > That's something I would be very much interested
> in
> > doing/maintaining/ collaborating in.
>
> Great! What do you need to get started?
>
> As for a place to put the results, perhaps a page in
> the wiki (OFBIZ)
> part of docs.ofbiz.org would be the best.
>
> -David
>
>
Re: OFBiz 4.x/5.0
Posted by David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>.
On Sep 14, 2006, at 2:57 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
> --- David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm not at all opposed to an effort to try to create
>> such a thing. Is
>> this something you would be interested in doing
>> Chris?
>
> That's something I would be very much interested in
> doing/maintaining/ collaborating in.
Great! What do you need to get started?
As for a place to put the results, perhaps a page in the wiki (OFBIZ)
part of docs.ofbiz.org would be the best.
-David
Re: OFBiz 4.x/5.0
Posted by Chris Howe <cj...@yahoo.com>.
--- David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>
wrote:
> I'm not at all opposed to an effort to try to create
> such a thing. Is
> this something you would be interested in doing
> Chris?
>
That's something I would be very much interested in
doing/maintaining/ collaborating in.
Re: OFBiz 4.x/5.0
Posted by David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>.
The first step should certainly be on the mailing list, ie deciding
what this might be and how it might look.
Andrew's comments were very good and hit the point well that OFBiz is
community driven in a very real way, ie in that it is driven by both
community needs and community contributions. There is no budget, no
dedicated hours from any individual or company, or any other resource
to work on project priorities.
I would love for that to change (especially if I was the beneficiary
of some of that change... ;) ), but that's the way it is now, and it
has actually worked out pretty well. It means future things are very
unpredictable, although the volume has been pretty good over time
with lots of good stuff coming into the project.
So, right now the "roadmap" is on this page, which has been there for
quite a while:
http://incubator.apache.org/ofbiz/comingsoon.html
I'm not at all opposed to an effort to try to create such a thing. Is
this something you would be interested in doing Chris?
-David
On Sep 14, 2006, at 3:35 AM, Chris Howe wrote:
> That's great nes on the RC1 stuff! With all of the
> JIRA notifications and a lot of the good ideas that
> are being transfered over to Apache/put to pasture
> because lack of resources and interest, I wonder if
> it's about time to discuss a roadmap of
> features/methodologies/concepts/goals for future
> releases.
>
> Also what medium that discussion should take place in.
> (personally think the mailing list is a bit
> restrictive for the kinds of broader discussions that
> would be taking place, JIRA with subtasks seems more
> appropriate but would like feedback)
Re: OFBiz 4.x/5.0
Posted by Andrew Sykes <an...@sykesdevelopment.com>.
Chris,
Does a "roadmap" focus development, or discourage those who want to
contribute something different?
Can a roadmap really be adhered to given the motivations/funding
strategies of most of the committers?
If it was very generalised it may work, but on the other hand, very
general ideas can be expressed via the mailing list.
Also, is an ambitious (probably unachievable) roadmap better for morale
and market perception than an unambitious (easily achievable) one? How
do you gauge what is "ambitious" for an opensource project?
Ok, so an email full of questions, I think it would be fascinating to
know some experiences with this type of thing!
- Andrew
On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 02:35 -0700, Chris Howe wrote:
> That's great nes on the RC1 stuff! With all of the
> JIRA notifications and a lot of the good ideas that
> are being transfered over to Apache/put to pasture
> because lack of resources and interest, I wonder if
> it's about time to discuss a roadmap of
> features/methodologies/concepts/goals for future
> releases.
>
> Also what medium that discussion should take place in.
> (personally think the mailing list is a bit
> restrictive for the kinds of broader discussions that
> would be taking place, JIRA with subtasks seems more
> appropriate but would like feedback)
--
Kind Regards
Andrew Sykes <an...@sykesdevelopment.com>
Sykes Development Ltd
http://www.sykesdevelopment.com
OFBiz 4.x/5.0
Posted by Chris Howe <cj...@yahoo.com>.
That's great nes on the RC1 stuff! With all of the
JIRA notifications and a lot of the good ideas that
are being transfered over to Apache/put to pasture
because lack of resources and interest, I wonder if
it's about time to discuss a roadmap of
features/methodologies/concepts/goals for future
releases.
Also what medium that discussion should take place in.
(personally think the mailing list is a bit
restrictive for the kinds of broader discussions that
would be taking place, JIRA with subtasks seems more
appropriate but would like feedback)
Re: Release Review
Posted by David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>.
On Sep 14, 2006, at 12:00 AM, Christian Geisert wrote:
> David E Jones schrieb:
>> Thanks for testing these Christian.
>> Hmmm... I just tried the archives and such locally and they seem
>> to be fine. Perhaps something happened in the download?
>
>> To hopefully help things I just copied the files over to
>> people.apache.org, so they are available as below.
>
> This looks good, md5 and signature are ok for the tgz.
That's good news Christian. Thanks for trying this other location.
-David
Re: Release Review
Posted by Christian Geisert <ch...@isu-gmbh.de>.
David E Jones schrieb:
>
> Thanks for testing these Christian.
>
> Hmmm... I just tried the archives and such locally and they seem to be
> fine. Perhaps something happened in the download?
> To hopefully help things I just copied the files over to
> people.apache.org, so they are available as below.
This looks good, md5 and signature are ok for the tgz.
Christian
Re: Release Review
Posted by David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>.
On Sep 13, 2006, at 6:46 PM, Christian Geisert wrote:
>> Yes, the Undersun server is way overloaded right now. We will be
>> shutting down Jira on that server soon which should solve this
>> problem for the most part.
>> Anyway, try it again and let me know. We had alarms go off earlier
>
> Yes, the download worked now but the md5 (I get
> cf136499afdbf09a3792220d72f0efda) and the signature (BAD signature)
> for apache-ofbiz-incubating-4.0.0.RC1.tgz seem to be wrong.
> Looking closer at it even a tar tvzf fails .. ah, it looks like the
> file has been gziped two times.
> How did you build the archives? I haven't found a dist-target in
> build.xml.
Thanks for testing these Christian.
Hmmm... I just tried the archives and such locally and they seem to
be fine. Perhaps something happened in the download?
To hopefully help things I just copied the files over to
people.apache.org, so they are available as below.
-David
http://people.apache.org/~jonesde/apache-ofbiz-incubating-4.0.0.RC1.zip
http://people.apache.org/~jonesde/apache-ofbiz-
incubating-4.0.0.RC1.zip.asc
http://people.apache.org/~jonesde/apache-ofbiz-
incubating-4.0.0.RC1.zip.md5
http://people.apache.org/~jonesde/apache-ofbiz-incubating-4.0.0.RC1.tgz
http://people.apache.org/~jonesde/apache-ofbiz-
incubating-4.0.0.RC1.tgz.asc
http://people.apache.org/~jonesde/apache-ofbiz-
incubating-4.0.0.RC1.tgz.md5
Re: Release Review
Posted by Christian Geisert <ch...@isu-gmbh.de>.
David E Jones schrieb:
>
> On Sep 10, 2006, at 6:13 PM, Christian Geisert wrote:
>> So this first RC is some kind of test for the release process and the
>> next RC will be done from a branch where only bugfixing will happen
>> until the release?
>
> Yes, this is just a "test snapshot" as described in the incubator
> guidelines.
>
> Real releases, like the one we plan to do shortly after graduation from
> incubation, will have a branch and such. Whether we will do a branch at
Good, I first thought that there will be a release without a branch.
[..]
> Because of that the plan is to have community driven releases. In other
> words, we do announce a release intention and ask people to test things
> and if there aren't any major show-stoppers, we do a branch and a
> release based on that branch. Once we do a branch like this a
> sub-community develops that can collaborate on making that branch a
> good stable artifact set over time as bug fixes only are back-ported
> and issues specific to that branch are fixed over time.
Sounds good
[..]
> Yes, the Undersun server is way overloaded right now. We will be
> shutting down Jira on that server soon which should solve this problem
> for the most part.
>
> Anyway, try it again and let me know. We had alarms go off earlier
Yes, the download worked now but the md5 (I get
cf136499afdbf09a3792220d72f0efda) and the signature (BAD signature)
for apache-ofbiz-incubating-4.0.0.RC1.tgz seem to be wrong.
Looking closer at it even a tar tvzf fails .. ah, it looks like the file
has been gziped two times.
How did you build the archives? I haven't found a dist-target in build.xml.
Christian
Re: Release Review
Posted by David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>.
On Sep 10, 2006, at 6:13 PM, Christian Geisert wrote:
> David E Jones schrieb:
>> For this initial RC1 for version 4.0.0 I decided to go with the
>> tag route and we'll do a branch later when we're ready to do a
>> final release. The "tag" in this case is just an svn "soft" tag,
>> ie the
>
> So this first RC is some kind of test for the release process and the
> next RC will be done from a branch where only bugfixing will happen
> until the release?
Yes, this is just a "test snapshot" as described in the incubator
guidelines.
Real releases, like the one we plan to do shortly after graduation
from incubation, will have a branch and such. Whether we will do a
branch at the release candidate phase, or even do a release candidate
phase for real releases, is yet to be decided. The nature of OFBiz is
quite a bit different from many open source projects and for reasons
that have been discussed in probably thousands of messages over the
years doing a "feature freeze" or anything like that in order to move
to a "stable" release seems now to be more than the OFBiz community
has resources to do properly.
Because of that the plan is to have community driven releases. In
other words, we do announce a release intention and ask people to
test things and if there aren't any major show-stoppers, we do a
branch and a release based on that branch. Once we do a branch like
this a sub-community develops that can collaborate on making that
branch a good stable artifact set over time as bug fixes only are
back-ported and issues specific to that branch are fixed over time.
>> The files are posted for initial review as attachments on the
>> docs.ofbiz.org site to this page:
>> http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/wAE
>
> I just wanted to download it but
> apache-ofbiz-incubating-4.0.0.RC1.zip gives an error (root cause:
> java.lang.OutOfMemoryError) and apache-ofbiz-
> incubating-4.0.0.RC1.tgz returns a blank page.
> If these files are too big for the wiki what about putting it under
> people.apache.org/~jonesde ?
Yes, the Undersun server is way overloaded right now. We will be
shutting down Jira on that server soon which should solve this
problem for the most part.
Anyway, try it again and let me know. We had alarms go off earlier
today on that server but it should all be fixed again now.
-David
Re: Release Review
Posted by Christian Geisert <ch...@isu-gmbh.de>.
David E Jones schrieb:
>
> For this initial RC1 for version 4.0.0 I decided to go with the tag
> route and we'll do a branch later when we're ready to do a final
> release. The "tag" in this case is just an svn "soft" tag, ie the
So this first RC is some kind of test for the release process and the
next RC will be done from a branch where only bugfixing will happen
until the release?
[..]
> The files are posted for initial review as attachments on the
> docs.ofbiz.org site to this page:
>
> http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/wAE
I just wanted to download it but
apache-ofbiz-incubating-4.0.0.RC1.zip gives an error (root cause:
java.lang.OutOfMemoryError) and apache-ofbiz-incubating-4.0.0.RC1.tgz
returns a blank page.
If these files are too big for the wiki what about putting it under
people.apache.org/~jonesde ?
Christian
Re: Release Review (was: Incubator September Report)
Posted by David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>.
On Sep 9, 2006, at 9:56 AM, Yoav Shapira wrote:
> On 9/9/06, David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com> wrote:
>>
>> On this topic... I've been looking at the release stuff and decided
>> to just go for it...
>
> In the future a heads-up, at least to the PMC but preferably to the
> public ofbiz-dev list, would be appreciated ;) Such a heads-up lets
> other committers make sure they've committed what they're done with
> and reverted experiments that could negatively impact a release.
>
>> For this initial RC1 for version 4.0.0 I decided to go with the tag
>> route and we'll do a branch later when we're ready to do a final
>> release.
>
> +1.
>
>> The "tag" in this case is just an svn "soft" tag, ie the
>> implicit tag from the revision number (see the REVISION) file in the
>> archive. A real tag in SVN is pretty much the same as a branch and I
>> think is a little heavier than what we need for this.
>
> OK, but just so you know SVN tags are cheap and light: it's a single
> (atomic) copy operation, that's it. A real SVN tag provides people
> with easy ways (including easily scriptable ways) to recreate past
> builds without needing to find the corresponding text file and read
> it.
These are good points. For this "release" the intent, as I understand
it, is to review the release process and all of the artifacts that
need to be in, and with, the release files. That is why I tried to
focus on those things below in the list of items to review. If there
are things partially completed (well, I know there are many... but
that's another problem/topic altogether...) as long as they are not
show-stoppers it should be okay for this pass.
Because we are not doing a branch, which is planned to be our main
quality control mechanism for releases, I'm hoping no one will
actually _use_ this "release" as one would normally use and rely on a
release to be better than the latest trunk revision.
I'm also guessing that given that this is our first time going
through this we'll almost certainly mess it up, and so we may have an
RC2 before it gets past the OFBiz PPMC.
>> 1. test un-archive and run as-is (should only require JDK installed)
>> 2. identify and show-stopper bugs that we should fix before a real RC
>> 3. check all ASF required files (NOTICE, LICENSE, KEYS, etc) and
>> headers
>> 4. check PGP and MD5 files
>> 5. anything else?
>
> Are there any automated unit tests done as part of the release
> creation? If so, the person cutting the release should also let us
> know whether they all passed (hopefully), or if any failed, which
> ones.
Yes, there are some unit tests. With the way it is setup in OFBiz
(for the limited automated tests that there are) you just run "ant
run-tests". This should be done on the same revision and after the
"ant run-install" but the tests are just run for testing and the
result after running the tests doesn't go into the release, if that
makes sense. It may be that in some cases the tests don't clean up
100% after themselves, and to make them easier to develop we don't
want to force this.
Anyway, for this release all of the unit tests were successful. Of
course, there are only 2 components with tests with 1 + 23 = 24 total
tests. These are just framework level things right now. This is one
of the directions of the project, but hasn't really received a lot of
attention or demand (or in other words: resources...).
>> The files are posted for initial review as attachments on the
>> docs.ofbiz.org site to this page:
>>
>> http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/wAE
>
> Since this is a public page, please add a clear disclaimer to let
> people know this is not an official release and hasn't been vetted by
> the PMC.
Great, good point. I added a comment to that effect on the wiki page.
One thing I was just thinking of about (not necessarily related to
the other comments in this email) that page on Confluence is that
only the committers can post to that area, so there is an added level
of confidence that the files posted come where the pages say they
come from.
Thanks for your feedback.
-David
Re: Release Review (was: Incubator September Report)
Posted by Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On 9/9/06, David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com> wrote:
>
> On this topic... I've been looking at the release stuff and decided
> to just go for it...
In the future a heads-up, at least to the PMC but preferably to the
public ofbiz-dev list, would be appreciated ;) Such a heads-up lets
other committers make sure they've committed what they're done with
and reverted experiments that could negatively impact a release.
> For this initial RC1 for version 4.0.0 I decided to go with the tag
> route and we'll do a branch later when we're ready to do a final
> release.
+1.
> The "tag" in this case is just an svn "soft" tag, ie the
> implicit tag from the revision number (see the REVISION) file in the
> archive. A real tag in SVN is pretty much the same as a branch and I
> think is a little heavier than what we need for this.
OK, but just so you know SVN tags are cheap and light: it's a single
(atomic) copy operation, that's it. A real SVN tag provides people
with easy ways (including easily scriptable ways) to recreate past
builds without needing to find the corresponding text file and read
it.
> 1. test un-archive and run as-is (should only require JDK installed)
> 2. identify and show-stopper bugs that we should fix before a real RC
> 3. check all ASF required files (NOTICE, LICENSE, KEYS, etc) and headers
> 4. check PGP and MD5 files
> 5. anything else?
Are there any automated unit tests done as part of the release
creation? If so, the person cutting the release should also let us
know whether they all passed (hopefully), or if any failed, which
ones.
> The files are posted for initial review as attachments on the
> docs.ofbiz.org site to this page:
>
> http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/wAE
Since this is a public page, please add a clear disclaimer to let
people know this is not an official release and hasn't been vetted by
the PMC.
Yoav
Re: Release Review
Posted by David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>.
I tried to write these different high level task steps for committers
who are frequently interacting with OFBiz so the "svn co" steps are
really more to establish a context than meant to be actually done. In
other words, people doing this will generally already have a clean
checkout somewhere (I always do for patches and such).
We could certainly add this alternative with both full locations, but
is there really an advantage to it? Even with the other method it is
still atomic isn't it?
If we do standardize on the full location alternative (we'll, if we
need a standard way of doing it...) then we should also always
explicitly include the revision number so that other commits
happening of a sudden do not interfere (ie between the time the
release builder intends to do the branch and when the actual branch
is done additional commits can be done). With the approach that uses
a local copy as the revision reference I don't think this is a problem.
-David
On Sep 10, 2006, at 7:43 AM, Yoav Shapira wrote:
> Jacopo,
>
> On 9/10/06, Jacopo Cappellato <ti...@sastau.it> wrote:
>> in the section "Steps for a branch in preparation for a real
>> release" I
>> think that the steps #1, 2, 3 (checkout, copy, commit) can be
>> replaced
>> by one svn command (server side copy):
>>
>> svn copy -m "" https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ofbiz/trunk
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ofbiz/branches/${branch-
>> name}
>>
>> (I have to check the syntax... this is off the top of my head)
>
> Your syntax is right, and this remote svn copy is the preferred method
> for tagging and branching because it's atomic. Just remember to give
> a real comment to -m, not the empty string ;) -m "cutting branch 4.0"
> is an example...
>
> Yoav
Re: Release Review
Posted by Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>.
Jacopo,
On 9/10/06, Jacopo Cappellato <ti...@sastau.it> wrote:
> in the section "Steps for a branch in preparation for a real release" I
> think that the steps #1, 2, 3 (checkout, copy, commit) can be replaced
> by one svn command (server side copy):
>
> svn copy -m "" https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ofbiz/trunk
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ofbiz/branches/${branch-name}
>
> (I have to check the syntax... this is off the top of my head)
Your syntax is right, and this remote svn copy is the preferred method
for tagging and branching because it's atomic. Just remember to give
a real comment to -m, not the empty string ;) -m "cutting branch 4.0"
is an example...
Yoav
Re: Release Review
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ti...@sastau.it>.
David,
this is a great document, really.
Just one quick note after a very first review:
in the section "Steps for a branch in preparation for a real release" I
think that the steps #1, 2, 3 (checkout, copy, commit) can be replaced
by one svn command (server side copy):
svn copy -m "" https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ofbiz/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ofbiz/branches/${branch-name}
(I have to check the syntax... this is off the top of my head)
Jacopo
David E Jones wrote:
>
> Sounds great Jacopo, I look forward to seeing feedback from you and others.
>
> BTW, for documenting the general release process I added a page here:
>
> http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/1wE
>
> -David
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2006, at 1:04 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>
>> David,
>>
>> that's great news, thanks for working on this.
>> I will download and test the release and I will provide feedback.
>>
>> I really hope that also others will help on this in the next few days:
>> after this we could be ready to complete the release process and ask
>> for graduation.
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>> On this topic... I've been looking at the release stuff and decided
>>> to just go for it...
>>> For this initial RC1 for version 4.0.0 I decided to go with the tag
>>> route and we'll do a branch later when we're ready to do a final
>>> release. The "tag" in this case is just an svn "soft" tag, ie the
>>> implicit tag from the revision number (see the REVISION) file in the
>>> archive. A real tag in SVN is pretty much the same as a branch and I
>>> think is a little heavier than what we need for this.
>>> Before moving on to the next step we need to review this among
>>> ourselves. Here is a list of things that I can think of that we need
>>> review in this:
>>> 1. test un-archive and run as-is (should only require JDK installed)
>>> 2. identify and show-stopper bugs that we should fix before a real RC
>>> 3. check all ASF required files (NOTICE, LICENSE, KEYS, etc) and headers
>>> 4. check PGP and MD5 files
>>> 5. anything else?
>>> Anyone who feels comfortable looking at these things, please do and
>>> comment as needed!
>>> The files are posted for initial review as attachments on the
>>> docs.ofbiz.org site to this page:
>>> http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/wAE
>>> Thanks in to everyone for your help getting to this point, and of
>>> course your help reviewing this so we can move to the next step!
>>> -David
>>> On Sep 8, 2006, at 11:39 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>>> I've prepared a draft of the Incubator September report here:
>>>>
>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2006
>>>>
>>>> The next OFBiz report will be due in December... do you think it is
>>>> possible to try to graduate before that date? Who can help to wrap
>>>> up the release candidate of OFBiz (that is the very last task we
>>>> have to complete, even if it is not a mandatory task)?
>>>>
>>>> Jacopo
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: Release Review
Posted by David E Jones <jo...@undersunconsulting.com>.
Sounds great Jacopo, I look forward to seeing feedback from you and
others.
BTW, for documenting the general release process I added a page here:
http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/1wE
-David
On Sep 10, 2006, at 1:04 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
> David,
>
> that's great news, thanks for working on this.
> I will download and test the release and I will provide feedback.
>
> I really hope that also others will help on this in the next few
> days: after this we could be ready to complete the release process
> and ask for graduation.
>
> Jacopo
>
> David E Jones wrote:
>> On this topic... I've been looking at the release stuff and
>> decided to just go for it...
>> For this initial RC1 for version 4.0.0 I decided to go with the
>> tag route and we'll do a branch later when we're ready to do a
>> final release. The "tag" in this case is just an svn "soft" tag,
>> ie the implicit tag from the revision number (see the REVISION)
>> file in the archive. A real tag in SVN is pretty much the same as
>> a branch and I think is a little heavier than what we need for this.
>> Before moving on to the next step we need to review this among
>> ourselves. Here is a list of things that I can think of that we
>> need review in this:
>> 1. test un-archive and run as-is (should only require JDK installed)
>> 2. identify and show-stopper bugs that we should fix before a real RC
>> 3. check all ASF required files (NOTICE, LICENSE, KEYS, etc) and
>> headers
>> 4. check PGP and MD5 files
>> 5. anything else?
>> Anyone who feels comfortable looking at these things, please do
>> and comment as needed!
>> The files are posted for initial review as attachments on the
>> docs.ofbiz.org site to this page:
>> http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/wAE
>> Thanks in to everyone for your help getting to this point, and of
>> course your help reviewing this so we can move to the next step!
>> -David
>> On Sep 8, 2006, at 11:39 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>> I've prepared a draft of the Incubator September report here:
>>>
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2006
>>>
>>> The next OFBiz report will be due in December... do you think it
>>> is possible to try to graduate before that date? Who can help to
>>> wrap up the release candidate of OFBiz (that is the very last
>>> task we have to complete, even if it is not a mandatory task)?
>>>
>>> Jacopo
>>>
>>>
>
Re: Release Review
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ti...@sastau.it>.
David,
that's great news, thanks for working on this.
I will download and test the release and I will provide feedback.
I really hope that also others will help on this in the next few days:
after this we could be ready to complete the release process and ask for
graduation.
Jacopo
David E Jones wrote:
>
> On this topic... I've been looking at the release stuff and decided to
> just go for it...
>
> For this initial RC1 for version 4.0.0 I decided to go with the tag
> route and we'll do a branch later when we're ready to do a final
> release. The "tag" in this case is just an svn "soft" tag, ie the
> implicit tag from the revision number (see the REVISION) file in the
> archive. A real tag in SVN is pretty much the same as a branch and I
> think is a little heavier than what we need for this.
>
> Before moving on to the next step we need to review this among
> ourselves. Here is a list of things that I can think of that we need
> review in this:
>
> 1. test un-archive and run as-is (should only require JDK installed)
> 2. identify and show-stopper bugs that we should fix before a real RC
> 3. check all ASF required files (NOTICE, LICENSE, KEYS, etc) and headers
> 4. check PGP and MD5 files
> 5. anything else?
>
> Anyone who feels comfortable looking at these things, please do and
> comment as needed!
>
> The files are posted for initial review as attachments on the
> docs.ofbiz.org site to this page:
>
> http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/wAE
>
> Thanks in to everyone for your help getting to this point, and of course
> your help reviewing this so we can move to the next step!
>
> -David
>
>
> On Sep 8, 2006, at 11:39 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>
>> I've prepared a draft of the Incubator September report here:
>>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2006
>>
>> The next OFBiz report will be due in December... do you think it is
>> possible to try to graduate before that date? Who can help to wrap up
>> the release candidate of OFBiz (that is the very last task we have to
>> complete, even if it is not a mandatory task)?
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>>