You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pekko.apache.org by PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org> on 2023/02/21 12:44:25 UTC
[DISCUSS] remove scripts and mentions of Lightbend release process
Hi everyone,
So far, when updating the Github and Paradox markdown files, I've tended to leave the Lightbend specific release train scripts and docs behind. Our release process will be similar but different. I think maybe, it's about time to start pruning it. It's easier if anyone wants to reference the Lightbend process to read it from the Akka repos or web site.
It's a separate discussion but I'd prefer to see the Apache Pekko release docs end up on cwiki.apache.org as opposed to in the Github repos.
Anyone with any opinions about this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] remove scripts and mentions of Lightbend release process
Posted by Matthew Benedict de Detrich <ma...@aiven.io.INVALID>.
> There is no requirement to use cwiki that I know of. As long as the
process is documented and produces acceptable results it should be fine.
If that's the case then my preference is github for reasons stated earlier
but I also would be fine if the community decides for cwiki
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 3:16 PM Claude Warren, Jr
<cl...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
> There is no requirement to use cwiki that I know of. As long as the
> process is documented and produces acceptable results it should be fine.
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:08 PM Matthew Benedict de Detrich
> <ma...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
>
> > (I was meant to say Clear instead of clearly before)
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 3:07 PM Matthew Benedict de Detrich <
> > matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io> wrote:
> >
> > > > The Lightbend release notes were already removed. I'm talking about
> > > the release process.
> > > Files like:
> > > * https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/RELEASING.md
> > > *
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/scripts/release-train-issue-template.md
> > >
> > > Clearly, I meant to say the release process earlier (sorry for using
> the
> > > wrong words) so my stance still stands, we should remove those and
> > replace
> > > them with our own (which we are doing) that follows the Apache process.
> > >
> > > It would be good to clarify if we are forced to use cwiki for release
> > > process but I suspect that we will end up using it anyway.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:57 PM PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> The Lightbend release notes were already removed. I'm talking about
> > >> the release process.
> > >> Files like:
> > >> * https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/RELEASING.md
> > >> *
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/scripts/release-train-issue-template.md
> > >>
> > >> They are sort of getting in the way when trying to replace
> > >> Lightbend/Akka branding. We have other discussions open about the
> > >> release process and I really don't want this thread to turn into an
> > >> offset of those threads.
> > >>
> > >> The Pekko release notes should also be discussed in their own separate
> > >> thread. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-612 is a
> > >> discussion about the Github release feature.
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 14:45, Matthew Benedict de Detrich
> > >> <ma...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally
> > >> modified
> > >> > without discussion on the mailing list.
> > >> >
> > >> > If the goal is to optimize for minimization of accidental
> modification
> > >> > without proper review, I would actually think purely as a tool
> having
> > >> the
> > >> > release notes in github would be far more effective due to its
> review
> > >> > system (i.e. PR's have to be approved before the matter of fact).
> > There
> > >> are
> > >> > also other technical advantages to having release notes on github
> > (wiki
> > >> or
> > >> > otherwise), i.e. release notes have a tendency to reference actual
> > code
> > >> (I
> > >> > can easily see this in our case with referencing and then
> documenting
> > >> sbt
> > >> > tasks/commands) which due to our source code also being hosted in
> > >> github is
> > >> > both more ergonomic and also less likely to get out of sync (which
> is
> > a
> > >> > common occurrence with disparate systems).
> > >> >
> > >> > That being said, it does seem there is strong precedent for having
> the
> > >> > release notes in cwiki rather than github (wiki or otherwise) and I
> > >> don't
> > >> > know if an escape hatch of "having release notes on github with a
> > >> reference
> > >> > on cwiki" is desirable or even appropriate.
> > >> >
> > >> > Regarding the Lightbend release notes, I am definitely all in for
> > >> removing
> > >> > them and referencing their site/docs if needed.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:17 PM Claude Warren, Jr
> > >> > <cl...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > +1
> > >> > >
> > >> > > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally
> > >> modified
> > >> > > without discussion on the mailing list.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:44 PM PJ Fanning <fanningpj@apache.org
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Hi everyone,
> > >> > > > So far, when updating the Github and Paradox markdown files,
> I've
> > >> tended
> > >> > > > to leave the Lightbend specific release train scripts and docs
> > >> behind.
> > >> > > Our
> > >> > > > release process will be similar but different. I think maybe,
> it's
> > >> about
> > >> > > > time to start pruning it. It's easier if anyone wants to
> reference
> > >> the
> > >> > > > Lightbend process to read it from the Akka repos or web site.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > It's a separate discussion but I'd prefer to see the Apache
> Pekko
> > >> release
> > >> > > > docs end up on cwiki.apache.org as opposed to in the Github
> > repos.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Anyone with any opinions about this?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
> > >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> >
> > >> > Matthew de Detrich
> > >> >
> > >> > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
> > >> >
> > >> > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
> > >> >
> > >> > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
> > >> >
> > >> > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
> > >> >
> > >> > *m:* +491603708037
> > >> >
> > >> > *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Matthew de Detrich
> > >
> > > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
> > >
> > > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
> > >
> > > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
> > >
> > > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
> > >
> > > *m:* +491603708037
> > >
> > > *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Matthew de Detrich
> >
> > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
> >
> > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
> >
> > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
> >
> > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
> >
> > *m:* +491603708037
> >
> > *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
> >
>
--
Matthew de Detrich
*Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
*m:* +491603708037
*w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
Re: [DISCUSS] remove scripts and mentions of Lightbend release process
Posted by "Claude Warren, Jr" <cl...@aiven.io.INVALID>.
There is no requirement to use cwiki that I know of. As long as the
process is documented and produces acceptable results it should be fine.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:08 PM Matthew Benedict de Detrich
<ma...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
> (I was meant to say Clear instead of clearly before)
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 3:07 PM Matthew Benedict de Detrich <
> matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io> wrote:
>
> > > The Lightbend release notes were already removed. I'm talking about
> > the release process.
> > Files like:
> > * https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/RELEASING.md
> > *
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/scripts/release-train-issue-template.md
> >
> > Clearly, I meant to say the release process earlier (sorry for using the
> > wrong words) so my stance still stands, we should remove those and
> replace
> > them with our own (which we are doing) that follows the Apache process.
> >
> > It would be good to clarify if we are forced to use cwiki for release
> > process but I suspect that we will end up using it anyway.
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:57 PM PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> The Lightbend release notes were already removed. I'm talking about
> >> the release process.
> >> Files like:
> >> * https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/RELEASING.md
> >> *
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/scripts/release-train-issue-template.md
> >>
> >> They are sort of getting in the way when trying to replace
> >> Lightbend/Akka branding. We have other discussions open about the
> >> release process and I really don't want this thread to turn into an
> >> offset of those threads.
> >>
> >> The Pekko release notes should also be discussed in their own separate
> >> thread. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-612 is a
> >> discussion about the Github release feature.
> >>
> >> On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 14:45, Matthew Benedict de Detrich
> >> <ma...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally
> >> modified
> >> > without discussion on the mailing list.
> >> >
> >> > If the goal is to optimize for minimization of accidental modification
> >> > without proper review, I would actually think purely as a tool having
> >> the
> >> > release notes in github would be far more effective due to its review
> >> > system (i.e. PR's have to be approved before the matter of fact).
> There
> >> are
> >> > also other technical advantages to having release notes on github
> (wiki
> >> or
> >> > otherwise), i.e. release notes have a tendency to reference actual
> code
> >> (I
> >> > can easily see this in our case with referencing and then documenting
> >> sbt
> >> > tasks/commands) which due to our source code also being hosted in
> >> github is
> >> > both more ergonomic and also less likely to get out of sync (which is
> a
> >> > common occurrence with disparate systems).
> >> >
> >> > That being said, it does seem there is strong precedent for having the
> >> > release notes in cwiki rather than github (wiki or otherwise) and I
> >> don't
> >> > know if an escape hatch of "having release notes on github with a
> >> reference
> >> > on cwiki" is desirable or even appropriate.
> >> >
> >> > Regarding the Lightbend release notes, I am definitely all in for
> >> removing
> >> > them and referencing their site/docs if needed.
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:17 PM Claude Warren, Jr
> >> > <cl...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > +1
> >> > >
> >> > > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally
> >> modified
> >> > > without discussion on the mailing list.
> >> > >
> >> > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:44 PM PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hi everyone,
> >> > > > So far, when updating the Github and Paradox markdown files, I've
> >> tended
> >> > > > to leave the Lightbend specific release train scripts and docs
> >> behind.
> >> > > Our
> >> > > > release process will be similar but different. I think maybe, it's
> >> about
> >> > > > time to start pruning it. It's easier if anyone wants to reference
> >> the
> >> > > > Lightbend process to read it from the Akka repos or web site.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > It's a separate discussion but I'd prefer to see the Apache Pekko
> >> release
> >> > > > docs end up on cwiki.apache.org as opposed to in the Github
> repos.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Anyone with any opinions about this?
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
> >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> >
> >> > Matthew de Detrich
> >> >
> >> > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
> >> >
> >> > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
> >> >
> >> > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
> >> >
> >> > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
> >> >
> >> > *m:* +491603708037
> >> >
> >> > *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> >
> > Matthew de Detrich
> >
> > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
> >
> > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
> >
> > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
> >
> > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
> >
> > *m:* +491603708037
> >
> > *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Matthew de Detrich
>
> *Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
>
> Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
>
> Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
>
> Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
>
> *m:* +491603708037
>
> *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
>
Re: [DISCUSS] remove scripts and mentions of Lightbend release process
Posted by Matthew Benedict de Detrich <ma...@aiven.io.INVALID>.
(I was meant to say Clear instead of clearly before)
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 3:07 PM Matthew Benedict de Detrich <
matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io> wrote:
> > The Lightbend release notes were already removed. I'm talking about
> the release process.
> Files like:
> * https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/RELEASING.md
> *
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/scripts/release-train-issue-template.md
>
> Clearly, I meant to say the release process earlier (sorry for using the
> wrong words) so my stance still stands, we should remove those and replace
> them with our own (which we are doing) that follows the Apache process.
>
> It would be good to clarify if we are forced to use cwiki for release
> process but I suspect that we will end up using it anyway.
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:57 PM PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> The Lightbend release notes were already removed. I'm talking about
>> the release process.
>> Files like:
>> * https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/RELEASING.md
>> *
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/scripts/release-train-issue-template.md
>>
>> They are sort of getting in the way when trying to replace
>> Lightbend/Akka branding. We have other discussions open about the
>> release process and I really don't want this thread to turn into an
>> offset of those threads.
>>
>> The Pekko release notes should also be discussed in their own separate
>> thread. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-612 is a
>> discussion about the Github release feature.
>>
>> On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 14:45, Matthew Benedict de Detrich
>> <ma...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> > > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally
>> modified
>> > without discussion on the mailing list.
>> >
>> > If the goal is to optimize for minimization of accidental modification
>> > without proper review, I would actually think purely as a tool having
>> the
>> > release notes in github would be far more effective due to its review
>> > system (i.e. PR's have to be approved before the matter of fact). There
>> are
>> > also other technical advantages to having release notes on github (wiki
>> or
>> > otherwise), i.e. release notes have a tendency to reference actual code
>> (I
>> > can easily see this in our case with referencing and then documenting
>> sbt
>> > tasks/commands) which due to our source code also being hosted in
>> github is
>> > both more ergonomic and also less likely to get out of sync (which is a
>> > common occurrence with disparate systems).
>> >
>> > That being said, it does seem there is strong precedent for having the
>> > release notes in cwiki rather than github (wiki or otherwise) and I
>> don't
>> > know if an escape hatch of "having release notes on github with a
>> reference
>> > on cwiki" is desirable or even appropriate.
>> >
>> > Regarding the Lightbend release notes, I am definitely all in for
>> removing
>> > them and referencing their site/docs if needed.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:17 PM Claude Warren, Jr
>> > <cl...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> > > +1
>> > >
>> > > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally
>> modified
>> > > without discussion on the mailing list.
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:44 PM PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi everyone,
>> > > > So far, when updating the Github and Paradox markdown files, I've
>> tended
>> > > > to leave the Lightbend specific release train scripts and docs
>> behind.
>> > > Our
>> > > > release process will be similar but different. I think maybe, it's
>> about
>> > > > time to start pruning it. It's easier if anyone wants to reference
>> the
>> > > > Lightbend process to read it from the Akka repos or web site.
>> > > >
>> > > > It's a separate discussion but I'd prefer to see the Apache Pekko
>> release
>> > > > docs end up on cwiki.apache.org as opposed to in the Github repos.
>> > > >
>> > > > Anyone with any opinions about this?
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
>> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Matthew de Detrich
>> >
>> > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
>> >
>> > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
>> >
>> > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
>> >
>> > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
>> >
>> > *m:* +491603708037
>> >
>> > *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> Matthew de Detrich
>
> *Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
>
> Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
>
> Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
>
> Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
>
> *m:* +491603708037
>
> *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
>
--
Matthew de Detrich
*Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
*m:* +491603708037
*w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
Re: [DISCUSS] remove scripts and mentions of Lightbend release process
Posted by Matthew Benedict de Detrich <ma...@aiven.io.INVALID>.
> The Lightbend release notes were already removed. I'm talking about
the release process.
Files like:
* https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/RELEASING.md
*
https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/scripts/release-train-issue-template.md
Clearly, I meant to say the release process earlier (sorry for using the
wrong words) so my stance still stands, we should remove those and replace
them with our own (which we are doing) that follows the Apache process.
It would be good to clarify if we are forced to use cwiki for release
process but I suspect that we will end up using it anyway.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:57 PM PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org> wrote:
> The Lightbend release notes were already removed. I'm talking about
> the release process.
> Files like:
> * https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/RELEASING.md
> *
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/scripts/release-train-issue-template.md
>
> They are sort of getting in the way when trying to replace
> Lightbend/Akka branding. We have other discussions open about the
> release process and I really don't want this thread to turn into an
> offset of those threads.
>
> The Pekko release notes should also be discussed in their own separate
> thread. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-612 is a
> discussion about the Github release feature.
>
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 14:45, Matthew Benedict de Detrich
> <ma...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally
> modified
> > without discussion on the mailing list.
> >
> > If the goal is to optimize for minimization of accidental modification
> > without proper review, I would actually think purely as a tool having the
> > release notes in github would be far more effective due to its review
> > system (i.e. PR's have to be approved before the matter of fact). There
> are
> > also other technical advantages to having release notes on github (wiki
> or
> > otherwise), i.e. release notes have a tendency to reference actual code
> (I
> > can easily see this in our case with referencing and then documenting sbt
> > tasks/commands) which due to our source code also being hosted in github
> is
> > both more ergonomic and also less likely to get out of sync (which is a
> > common occurrence with disparate systems).
> >
> > That being said, it does seem there is strong precedent for having the
> > release notes in cwiki rather than github (wiki or otherwise) and I don't
> > know if an escape hatch of "having release notes on github with a
> reference
> > on cwiki" is desirable or even appropriate.
> >
> > Regarding the Lightbend release notes, I am definitely all in for
> removing
> > them and referencing their site/docs if needed.
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:17 PM Claude Warren, Jr
> > <cl...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally
> modified
> > > without discussion on the mailing list.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:44 PM PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > So far, when updating the Github and Paradox markdown files, I've
> tended
> > > > to leave the Lightbend specific release train scripts and docs
> behind.
> > > Our
> > > > release process will be similar but different. I think maybe, it's
> about
> > > > time to start pruning it. It's easier if anyone wants to reference
> the
> > > > Lightbend process to read it from the Akka repos or web site.
> > > >
> > > > It's a separate discussion but I'd prefer to see the Apache Pekko
> release
> > > > docs end up on cwiki.apache.org as opposed to in the Github repos.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone with any opinions about this?
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Matthew de Detrich
> >
> > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
> >
> > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
> >
> > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
> >
> > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
> >
> > *m:* +491603708037
> >
> > *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
>
>
--
Matthew de Detrich
*Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
*m:* +491603708037
*w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
Re: [DISCUSS] remove scripts and mentions of Lightbend release process
Posted by PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org>.
The Lightbend release notes were already removed. I'm talking about
the release process.
Files like:
* https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/RELEASING.md
* https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/scripts/release-train-issue-template.md
They are sort of getting in the way when trying to replace
Lightbend/Akka branding. We have other discussions open about the
release process and I really don't want this thread to turn into an
offset of those threads.
The Pekko release notes should also be discussed in their own separate
thread. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-612 is a
discussion about the Github release feature.
On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 14:45, Matthew Benedict de Detrich
<ma...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
>
> > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally modified
> without discussion on the mailing list.
>
> If the goal is to optimize for minimization of accidental modification
> without proper review, I would actually think purely as a tool having the
> release notes in github would be far more effective due to its review
> system (i.e. PR's have to be approved before the matter of fact). There are
> also other technical advantages to having release notes on github (wiki or
> otherwise), i.e. release notes have a tendency to reference actual code (I
> can easily see this in our case with referencing and then documenting sbt
> tasks/commands) which due to our source code also being hosted in github is
> both more ergonomic and also less likely to get out of sync (which is a
> common occurrence with disparate systems).
>
> That being said, it does seem there is strong precedent for having the
> release notes in cwiki rather than github (wiki or otherwise) and I don't
> know if an escape hatch of "having release notes on github with a reference
> on cwiki" is desirable or even appropriate.
>
> Regarding the Lightbend release notes, I am definitely all in for removing
> them and referencing their site/docs if needed.
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:17 PM Claude Warren, Jr
> <cl...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally modified
> > without discussion on the mailing list.
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:44 PM PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > > So far, when updating the Github and Paradox markdown files, I've tended
> > > to leave the Lightbend specific release train scripts and docs behind.
> > Our
> > > release process will be similar but different. I think maybe, it's about
> > > time to start pruning it. It's easier if anyone wants to reference the
> > > Lightbend process to read it from the Akka repos or web site.
> > >
> > > It's a separate discussion but I'd prefer to see the Apache Pekko release
> > > docs end up on cwiki.apache.org as opposed to in the Github repos.
> > >
> > > Anyone with any opinions about this?
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Matthew de Detrich
>
> *Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
>
> Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
>
> Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
>
> Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
>
> *m:* +491603708037
>
> *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] remove scripts and mentions of Lightbend release process
Posted by Matthew Benedict de Detrich <ma...@aiven.io.INVALID>.
> cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally modified
without discussion on the mailing list.
If the goal is to optimize for minimization of accidental modification
without proper review, I would actually think purely as a tool having the
release notes in github would be far more effective due to its review
system (i.e. PR's have to be approved before the matter of fact). There are
also other technical advantages to having release notes on github (wiki or
otherwise), i.e. release notes have a tendency to reference actual code (I
can easily see this in our case with referencing and then documenting sbt
tasks/commands) which due to our source code also being hosted in github is
both more ergonomic and also less likely to get out of sync (which is a
common occurrence with disparate systems).
That being said, it does seem there is strong precedent for having the
release notes in cwiki rather than github (wiki or otherwise) and I don't
know if an escape hatch of "having release notes on github with a reference
on cwiki" is desirable or even appropriate.
Regarding the Lightbend release notes, I am definitely all in for removing
them and referencing their site/docs if needed.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:17 PM Claude Warren, Jr
<cl...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote:
> +1
>
> cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally modified
> without discussion on the mailing list.
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:44 PM PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> > So far, when updating the Github and Paradox markdown files, I've tended
> > to leave the Lightbend specific release train scripts and docs behind.
> Our
> > release process will be similar but different. I think maybe, it's about
> > time to start pruning it. It's easier if anyone wants to reference the
> > Lightbend process to read it from the Akka repos or web site.
> >
> > It's a separate discussion but I'd prefer to see the Apache Pekko release
> > docs end up on cwiki.apache.org as opposed to in the Github repos.
> >
> > Anyone with any opinions about this?
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
> >
> >
>
--
Matthew de Detrich
*Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
*m:* +491603708037
*w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetrich@aiven.io
Re: [DISCUSS] remove scripts and mentions of Lightbend release process
Posted by "Claude Warren, Jr" <cl...@aiven.io.INVALID>.
+1
cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally modified
without discussion on the mailing list.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:44 PM PJ Fanning <fa...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> So far, when updating the Github and Paradox markdown files, I've tended
> to leave the Lightbend specific release train scripts and docs behind. Our
> release process will be similar but different. I think maybe, it's about
> time to start pruning it. It's easier if anyone wants to reference the
> Lightbend process to read it from the Akka repos or web site.
>
> It's a separate discussion but I'd prefer to see the Apache Pekko release
> docs end up on cwiki.apache.org as opposed to in the Github repos.
>
> Anyone with any opinions about this?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pekko.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pekko.apache.org
>
>