accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Time to release 1.6.1?
Date Thu, 19 Jun 2014 17:57:23 GMT
"I just don't want to ruffle anyone's feathers (or waste my own time) if
it's going to be -1'ed because of insufficient testing."

Yeah, understood. I'm just thinking that it might be good to first propose
new guidelines for a bugfix release, and then release accordingly. If
somebody objects to the looser guidelines (it won't be me), that should
come out in the guidelines proposal, rather than hold up the release.


--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii


On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:

> In the below context, I was using the term "guidelines" loosely, not in
> the strictest grammatical sense. I did not see anything on
> http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/releasing.html that makes me think
> one way or the other.
>
> The general verbage of the page is using a SHOULD context which is usually
> interpreted as a "must". I just don't want to ruffle anyone's feathers (or
> waste my own time) if it's going to be -1'ed because of insufficient
> testing.
>
>
> On 6/19/14, 9:27 AM, Christopher wrote:
>
>> Guidelines don't force anything. By definition, a guideline is a
>> suggestion
>> or recommendation. Even if they were strict requirements, we can agree on
>> different guidelines for bugfix releases. Ultimately, it comes down to
>> whoever has time to create the release plan/release candidate and the
>> results of the vote.
>>
>> I agree with Mike that 1.5.2 should get out first, and that the upgrade
>> discussion should complete first. If we're going to support 1.4->1.6
>> upgrades (and I think that's the direction we're converging on), that
>> should happen in 1.6.1, not later.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  I was thinking the same thing, but I also haven't made any strides
>>> towards
>>> getting 1.5.2 closer to happening (as I said I'd try to do).
>>>
>>> I still lack "physical" resources to do the week-long testing as our
>>> guidelines currently force us to do. I still think this testing is
>>> excessive if we're actually releasing bug-fixes, but it does
>>> differentiate
>>> us from other communities.
>>>
>>> I'm really not sure how to approach this which is really why I've been
>>> stalling on it.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/19/14, 7:18 AM, Mike Drob wrote:
>>>
>>>  I'd like to see 1.5.2 released first, just in case there are issues we
>>>> discover during that process that need to be addressed. Also, I think it
>>>> would be useful to resolve the discussion surrounding upgrades[1] before
>>>> releasing.
>>>>
>>>> [1]:
>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/accumulo-dev/
>>>> 201406.mbox/%3CCAGHyZ6LFuwH%3DqGF9JYpitOY9yYDG-
>>>> sop9g6iq57VFPQRnzmyNQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Corey Nolet <cjnolet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   I'd like to start getting a candidate together if there are no
>>>>
>>>>> objections.
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like we have 65 resolved tickets with a fix version of 1.6.1.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message