You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to cvs@httpd.apache.org by je...@apache.org on 2002/05/28 19:06:09 UTC
cvs commit: httpd-site/xdocs/dev release.xml
jerenkrantz 02/05/28 10:06:09
Added: docs/dev release.html
xdocs/dev release.xml
Log:
Add a document that describes our release policies and release guidelines.
This is not a walkthrough of a release (see how-to-release for that), but
attempts to explain what the high-level overview of our release process is.
This also explains the alpha, beta, GA designations which has been woefully
undocumented anywhere.
Feel free to correct any mistakes.
Revision Changes Path
1.1 httpd-site/docs/dev/release.html
Index: release.html
===================================================================
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"/>
<meta name="author" content="Documentation Group" /><meta name="email" content="docs@httpd.apache.org" />
<title>Apache HTTP Server Release Guidelines - The Apache HTTP Server Project</title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000" link="#525D76">
<p><a href="/"><img src="../images/httpd_logo_wide.gif" alt="The Apache HTTP Server Project" border="0"/></a></p>
<table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="4">
<tr>
<!-- LEFT SIDE NAVIGATION -->
<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap">
<p><b>Essentials</b></p>
<menu compact="compact">
<li><a href="/ABOUT_APACHE.html">About</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.apache.org/LICENSE.txt">License</a></li>
<li><a href="/docs/misc/FAQ.html">FAQ</a></li>
<li><a href="/security_report.html">Security<br />Reports</a></li>
</menu>
<p><b>Download!</b></p>
<menu compact="compact">
<li><a href="http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/httpd/">from a mirror</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/">from here</a></li>
</menu>
<p><b><a
href="/docs-project/">Documentation</a></b></p>
<menu compact="compact">
<li><a href="/docs/">Apache 1.3</a></li>
<li><a href="/docs-2.0/">Apache 2.0</a></li>
</menu>
<p><b>Get Involved</b></p>
<menu compact="compact">
<li><a href="/lists.html">Mailing Lists</a></li>
<li><a href="/bug_report.html">Bug Reports</a></li>
<li><a href="/dev/">Developer Info</a></li>
</menu>
<p><b>Subprojects</b></p>
<menu compact="compact">
<li><a href="/docs-project/">Docs</a></li>
<li><a href="/test/">Test</a></li>
</menu>
<p><b><a
href="/info/">Miscellaneous</a></b></p>
<menu compact="compact">
<li><a href="/contributors/">Contributors</a></li>
<li><a href="/awards.html">Awards</a></li>
<li><a href="http://nav.webring.org/navcgi?ring=apachesupport;list">Support<br />Webring</a></li>
</menu>
</td>
<!-- RIGHT SIDE INFORMATION -->
<td align="left" valign="top">
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>Introduction</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>This document describes the general release policies used by the
Apache HTTP Server Project to create releases of httpd-2.0 (the current
Apache 2.0 branch). As described herein, this policy is not set in stone
and may be adjusted by the Release Manager.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>Who can make a release?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>Technically, any one can make a release of the source code due to the
<a href="http://www.apache.org/LICENSE.txt">Apache Software License</a>.
However, only members of the Apache HTTP Server Project (committers) to
project can make a release designated with Apache. Other people must
call their release something other than "Apache" unless they obtain
written permission from the Apache Software Foundation.</p>
<p>Following our official release policies, we will only accept release
binaries from members of the Apache HTTP Server Project for inclusion on our
website. This ensures that our binaries can be supported by members of
the project. Other people are free to make binaries, but we will not
post them on our website.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>Who is in charge of a release?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>The release is coordinated by the Release Manager (hereafter, abbreviated
as RM). Since this job requires coordination of the development community
(and access to CVS), only committers to the project can be RM. However,
there is no set RM. Any committer may perform a release at any time. In
order to facilitate communication, it is deemed nice to alert the
community with your planned release schedule before executing the
release. A release should only be made when there is a plan to publicly
release it. (A release should not be made only for private distribution.
A private release is more suitable for that.)</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>Who may make a good candidate for RM?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>Someone with lots of time to kill. Being an RM is a very important job
in our community because it takes a fair amount of time to produce a stable
release. If you feel lucky, a release could be distributed without testing,
but our experience has shown that leads to a higher number of <i>dud</i>
releases. In general, our experience has shown that a well-coordinated
release fares better than non-coordinated releases.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>When do I know if it is a good time to release?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>It is our convention to indicate <i>showstoppers</i> in the STATUS
file in the repository. A showstopper entry does not automatically
imply that a release can not be made. As the RM has final authority
on what makes it into a release, they can choose to ignore the entries.
An item being denoted as a <i>showstopper</i> indicates that the group
has come to a consensus that no further releases can be made until the
entry is resolved. These items may be bugs, outstanding vetos that have
not yet been resolved, or enhancements that must make it into the
release. Note that the RM may also add showstopper entries to indicate
what issues must be resolved before a release may be created.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>What power does the RM yield?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>Regarding what makes it into a release, the RM is the unquestioned
authority. No one can contest what makes it into the release. The
community will judge the release's quality after it has been issued,
but the community can not force the RM to include a feature that they
feel uncomfortable adding. Remember that this document is only a
guideline to the community and future RMs - each RM may run a release
in a different way. If you don't like what an RM is doing, start
preparing for your own competing release.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>How does an impending release affect development?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>It can not. Let's repeat that: <b>an impending release can not affect
development of the project</b>. It is the RM's responsibility to identify
what changes should make it into the release. The RM may have an
intermediate tag, so the RM can merge in or reject changes as they are
committed to the repository's HEAD.</p>
<p>Committers <i>may</i> voluntarily refrain from committing patches if
they wish to ease the burden on the RM, but they are under
<font color="red">no</font> obligation to do so. This is one reason why we
recommend that the RM have plenty of time on their hands - they may have to
deal with a rapidly changing target. It's not an easy job.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>How can an RM be confident in a release?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>The RM may perform sanity checks on release candidates. One highly
recommended suggestion is to run the httpd-test suite against the candidate.
The release candidate should pass all of the relevant tests before making
it official.</p>
<p>Another good idea is to coordinate running a candidate on apache.org for
a period of time. This will require coordination with the current
maintainers of apache.org's httpd instance. In the past, the group has
liked to see approximately 48-72 hours of usage in production to certify
that the release is functional in the real world. Note that some committers
may choose to not vote on a release until feedback has been gathered from the
apache.org instance running the release. This is not a requirement (each
committer is free to come up with their own personal voting guidelines),
but it produces a feeling of confidence in the release that it will not
be a <i>dud</i>.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>How to do a release?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>Once the tree has been suitably tested by the RM and any other
interested parties, they should "roll" the release.</p>
<p>Key points:</p>
<ul>
<li>Ensure that the RM's PGP/GPG key is in the httpd-dist/KEYS file</li>
<li>Create an official APACHE_X_Y_Z tag based of the candidate tree</li>
<li>Run httpd_roll_release script</li>
<li>Copy the generated release tarballs and signatures to
daedalus:/www/httpd.apache.org/dev/dist</li>
<li>Email dev@httpd.apache.org, current-testers@httpd.apache.org, stable-testers@httpd.apache.org to inform them of the release.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>What can I call this release?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>At this point, the release is an alpha. The Apache HTTP Server Project
has three classifications for its releases:</p>
<ul>
<li>Alpha</li>
<li>Beta</li>
<li>General Availability (GA)</li>
</ul>
<p>Alpha indicates that the release is not meant for mainstream usage or
may have serious problems that prohibits its use. When a release is
initially created, it automatically becomes alpha quality.</p>
<p>Beta indicates that at least three committers have voted positively
for beta status and there were more positive than negative votes for
beta designation. This indicates that it is expected to compile and
perform basic tasks. However, there may be problems with this release
that prohibit its widespread adoption.</p>
<p>General Availability (GA) indicates that at least three committers
have voted positively for GA status and that there were more positive
than negative votes for GA designation. This release is recommended
for production usage.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>Who can vote?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>Non-committers may cast a vote for a release's quality. In fact,
this is extremely encouraged as it provides much-needed feedback to
the community about the release's quality. However, only binding
votes casted by committers count towards the designation.</p>
<p>Note that no one may veto a release. Releases may not receive a
designation level if a problem is found that inhibits proper
functionality. The group may (implicitly or explicitly) revoke all votes
on a release if there is a problem. However, if there is a -1 vote for
a particular designation and there are greater than 3 positive votes
and more positive than negative votes (i.e. majority consensus), the
appropriate designation is conferred upon the release.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>How do we make it public?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>Once the release has reached the highest-available designation (as deemed
by the RM), the release can be moved to the httpd distribution directory
on apache.org. Approximately 24 to 48 hours after the files have been moved,
a public announcement can be made. We wait this period so that the mirrors
can receive the new release before the announcement. An email can then be
sent to the announcements lists (announce@apache.org,
announce@httpd.apache.org). Drafts of the announcement are usually
posted on the development list before sending the announcement to let the
community clarify any issues that we feel should be addressed in the
announcement.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>Should the announcement wait for binaries?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>In short, no. The only files that are required for a public release
are the source tarballs (.tar.Z, .tar.gz). Volunteers can provide
the Win32 source distribution and binaries, and other esoteric
binaries.</p>
<p>Note that the typical Win32 source distribution differs from the
original tarball in that it has generated project files as well as
the CRLF line endings required for that platform. More information
can be found <a href="http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/platform/win_compiling.html">here</a>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>Oops. We found a problem.</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>At this point, the release has been created. No code changes can be
made in this release. If a problem is found, it will have to be addressed
in the next release or a patch can be made available. No changes can
be made between alpha, beta, and GA status. The only difference is the
file name that is downloaded by the users. If an alpha tarball is created,
but there was an error that can be resolved by re-rolling the tarball,
it may be permissible to re-roll the release. But, the code itself may
<font color="red">not</font> change from designation to designation.</p>
<p>There are two courses of action:</p>
<p>Revoke the release and immediately create another one that has a fix
to this problem. You can take the old release, apply the single patch,
and start the voting process again. This is only recommended for
critical problems found early on in the release cycle.</p>
<p>If the problem is less severe, place the patch to the problem in the
/dist/httpd/patches/apply_to_X.Y.Z directory. A link to this directory
should be included in the release notes with descriptions as to what
problem each patch addresses.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="100%">
<tr><td bgcolor="#525D76">
<font color="#ffffff" face="arial,helvetica,sanserif">
<strong>Suggestions?</strong>
</font>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>
<blockquote>
<p>As always, if you have any suggestions or comments on our process,
please feel free to email our developer mailing list with your comments.
We hope you found this document useful.</p>
</blockquote>
</td></tr>
</table>
</td>
</tr>
<!-- FOOTER -->
<tr><td colspan="2"><hr noshade="noshade" size="1"/></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2" align="center">
<font size="-1">
<em>Copyright © 1999-2002, The Apache Software Foundation</em>
</font>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>
1.1 httpd-site/xdocs/dev/release.xml
Index: release.xml
===================================================================
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<document>
<properties>
<author email="docs@httpd.apache.org">Documentation Group</author>
<title>Apache HTTP Server Release Guidelines</title>
</properties>
<body>
<section><title>Introduction</title>
<p>This document describes the general release policies used by the
Apache HTTP Server Project to create releases of httpd-2.0 (the current
Apache 2.0 branch). As described herein, this policy is not set in stone
and may be adjusted by the Release Manager.</p>
</section>
<section><title>Who can make a release?</title>
<p>Technically, any one can make a release of the source code due to the
<a href="http://www.apache.org/LICENSE.txt">Apache Software License</a>.
However, only members of the Apache HTTP Server Project (committers) to
project can make a release designated with Apache. Other people must
call their release something other than "Apache" unless they obtain
written permission from the Apache Software Foundation.</p>
<p>Following our official release policies, we will only accept release
binaries from members of the Apache HTTP Server Project for inclusion on our
website. This ensures that our binaries can be supported by members of
the project. Other people are free to make binaries, but we will not
post them on our website.</p>
</section>
<section><title>Who is in charge of a release?</title>
<p>The release is coordinated by the Release Manager (hereafter, abbreviated
as RM). Since this job requires coordination of the development community
(and access to CVS), only committers to the project can be RM. However,
there is no set RM. Any committer may perform a release at any time. In
order to facilitate communication, it is deemed nice to alert the
community with your planned release schedule before executing the
release. A release should only be made when there is a plan to publicly
release it. (A release should not be made only for private distribution.
A private release is more suitable for that.)</p>
</section>
<section><title>Who may make a good candidate for RM?</title>
<p>Someone with lots of time to kill. Being an RM is a very important job
in our community because it takes a fair amount of time to produce a stable
release. If you feel lucky, a release could be distributed without testing,
but our experience has shown that leads to a higher number of <i>dud</i>
releases. In general, our experience has shown that a well-coordinated
release fares better than non-coordinated releases.</p>
</section>
<section><title>When do I know if it is a good time to release?</title>
<p>It is our convention to indicate <i>showstoppers</i> in the STATUS
file in the repository. A showstopper entry does not automatically
imply that a release can not be made. As the RM has final authority
on what makes it into a release, they can choose to ignore the entries.
An item being denoted as a <i>showstopper</i> indicates that the group
has come to a consensus that no further releases can be made until the
entry is resolved. These items may be bugs, outstanding vetos that have
not yet been resolved, or enhancements that must make it into the
release. Note that the RM may also add showstopper entries to indicate
what issues must be resolved before a release may be created.</p>
</section>
<section><title>What power does the RM yield?</title>
<p>Regarding what makes it into a release, the RM is the unquestioned
authority. No one can contest what makes it into the release. The
community will judge the release's quality after it has been issued,
but the community can not force the RM to include a feature that they
feel uncomfortable adding. Remember that this document is only a
guideline to the community and future RMs - each RM may run a release
in a different way. If you don't like what an RM is doing, start
preparing for your own competing release.</p>
</section>
<section><title>How does an impending release affect development?</title>
<p>It can not. Let's repeat that: <b>an impending release can not affect
development of the project</b>. It is the RM's responsibility to identify
what changes should make it into the release. The RM may have an
intermediate tag, so the RM can merge in or reject changes as they are
committed to the repository's HEAD.</p>
<p>Committers <i>may</i> voluntarily refrain from committing patches if
they wish to ease the burden on the RM, but they are under
<font color="red">no</font> obligation to do so. This is one reason why we
recommend that the RM have plenty of time on their hands - they may have to
deal with a rapidly changing target. It's not an easy job.</p>
</section>
<section><title>How can an RM be confident in a release?</title>
<p>The RM may perform sanity checks on release candidates. One highly
recommended suggestion is to run the httpd-test suite against the candidate.
The release candidate should pass all of the relevant tests before making
it official.</p>
<p>Another good idea is to coordinate running a candidate on apache.org for
a period of time. This will require coordination with the current
maintainers of apache.org's httpd instance. In the past, the group has
liked to see approximately 48-72 hours of usage in production to certify
that the release is functional in the real world. Note that some committers
may choose to not vote on a release until feedback has been gathered from the
apache.org instance running the release. This is not a requirement (each
committer is free to come up with their own personal voting guidelines),
but it produces a feeling of confidence in the release that it will not
be a <i>dud</i>.</p>
</section>
<section><title>How to do a release?</title>
<p>Once the tree has been suitably tested by the RM and any other
interested parties, they should "roll" the release.</p>
<p>Key points:</p>
<ul>
<li>Ensure that the RM's PGP/GPG key is in the httpd-dist/KEYS file</li>
<li>Create an official APACHE_X_Y_Z tag based of the candidate tree</li>
<li>Run httpd_roll_release script</li>
<li>Copy the generated release tarballs and signatures to
daedalus:/www/httpd.apache.org/dev/dist</li>
<li>Email dev@httpd.apache.org, current-testers@httpd.apache.org, stable-testers@httpd.apache.org to inform them of the release.</li>
</ul>
</section>
<section><title>What can I call this release?</title>
<p>At this point, the release is an alpha. The Apache HTTP Server Project
has three classifications for its releases:</p>
<ul>
<li>Alpha</li>
<li>Beta</li>
<li>General Availability (GA)</li>
</ul>
<p>Alpha indicates that the release is not meant for mainstream usage or
may have serious problems that prohibits its use. When a release is
initially created, it automatically becomes alpha quality.</p>
<p>Beta indicates that at least three committers have voted positively
for beta status and there were more positive than negative votes for
beta designation. This indicates that it is expected to compile and
perform basic tasks. However, there may be problems with this release
that prohibit its widespread adoption.</p>
<p>General Availability (GA) indicates that at least three committers
have voted positively for GA status and that there were more positive
than negative votes for GA designation. This release is recommended
for production usage.</p>
</section>
<section><title>Who can vote?</title>
<p>Non-committers may cast a vote for a release's quality. In fact,
this is extremely encouraged as it provides much-needed feedback to
the community about the release's quality. However, only binding
votes casted by committers count towards the designation.</p>
<p>Note that no one may veto a release. Releases may not receive a
designation level if a problem is found that inhibits proper
functionality. The group may (implicitly or explicitly) revoke all votes
on a release if there is a problem. However, if there is a -1 vote for
a particular designation and there are greater than 3 positive votes
and more positive than negative votes (i.e. majority consensus), the
appropriate designation is conferred upon the release.</p>
</section>
<section><title>How do we make it public?</title>
<p>Once the release has reached the highest-available designation (as deemed
by the RM), the release can be moved to the httpd distribution directory
on apache.org. Approximately 24 to 48 hours after the files have been moved,
a public announcement can be made. We wait this period so that the mirrors
can receive the new release before the announcement. An email can then be
sent to the announcements lists (announce@apache.org,
announce@httpd.apache.org). Drafts of the announcement are usually
posted on the development list before sending the announcement to let the
community clarify any issues that we feel should be addressed in the
announcement.</p>
</section>
<section><title>Should the announcement wait for binaries?</title>
<p>In short, no. The only files that are required for a public release
are the source tarballs (.tar.Z, .tar.gz). Volunteers can provide
the Win32 source distribution and binaries, and other esoteric
binaries.</p>
<p>Note that the typical Win32 source distribution differs from the
original tarball in that it has generated project files as well as
the CRLF line endings required for that platform. More information
can be found <a
href="http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/platform/win_compiling.html">here</a>.
</p>
</section>
<section><title>Oops. We found a problem.</title>
<p>At this point, the release has been created. No code changes can be
made in this release. If a problem is found, it will have to be addressed
in the next release or a patch can be made available. No changes can
be made between alpha, beta, and GA status. The only difference is the
file name that is downloaded by the users. If an alpha tarball is created,
but there was an error that can be resolved by re-rolling the tarball,
it may be permissible to re-roll the release. But, the code itself may
<font color="red">not</font> change from designation to designation.</p>
<p>There are two courses of action:</p>
<p>Revoke the release and immediately create another one that has a fix
to this problem. You can take the old release, apply the single patch,
and start the voting process again. This is only recommended for
critical problems found early on in the release cycle.</p>
<p>If the problem is less severe, place the patch to the problem in the
/dist/httpd/patches/apply_to_X.Y.Z directory. A link to this directory
should be included in the release notes with descriptions as to what
problem each patch addresses.</p>
</section>
<section><title>Suggestions?</title>
<p>As always, if you have any suggestions or comments on our process,
please feel free to email our developer mailing list with your comments.
We hope you found this document useful.</p>
</section>
</body>
</document>