Re: [general] Release process (was [result][vote]Declare r917296 as 6.0M1)

[Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org>]

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Mark Hindess
<ma...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> In message <4B...@gmail.com>, Tim Ellison writes:
>>
>> I appreciate sebb's review and comments.  It would have been good to
>> hear them during the two week freeze leading up to the vote rather
>> than after the vote was concluded :-)
>
> This comment isn't entirely fair.  Sebb's initial review comments
> were about the binaries which we only created after the release was
> "completed".  This is one reason why I had more sympathy for his view
> that the release should be cancelled.
>
> I also appreciate sebb's comments.  So, while he could have made them
> by building our source and reviewing the resulting binaries, perhaps we
> should attempt to make this kind of review easier?

Don't we have binary builds coming out of Hudson periodically?

>
> It is tricky to see how to do this while still placing the emphasis on
> voting on source releases.
>
> It would be more work but perhaps we should create "minimal" binaries
> (one hdk bundle should be sufficient perhaps one windows and one linux)
> at the start of the feature freeze period?
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Regards,
>  Mark.
>
>
>

Re: [general] Release process (was [result][vote]Declare r917296 as 6.0M1)

[Mark Hindess <ma...@googlemail.com>]

In message <3b...@mail.gmail.com>, Natha
n Beyer writes:
>
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Mark Hindess
> <ma...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > In message <4B...@gmail.com>, Tim Ellison writes:
> >>
> >> I appreciate sebb's review and comments.  It would have been good
> >> to hear them during the two week freeze leading up to the vote
> >> rather than after the vote was concluded :-)
> >
> > This comment isn't entirely fair.  Sebb's initial review comments
> > were about the binaries which we only created after the release was
> > "completed".  This is one reason why I had more sympathy for his
> > view that the release should be cancelled.
> >
> > I also appreciate sebb's comments.  So, while he could have made them
> > by building our source and reviewing the resulting binaries, perhaps
> > we should attempt to make this kind of review easier?
>
> Don't we have binary builds coming out of Hudson periodically?

Indeed.  Though they are built from svn directly rather than from svn
via source artifacts, so I worry we'd miss something that would affect
the release.

-Mark.