activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] release process improvements
Date Tue, 12 Sep 2017 20:41:07 GMT
-1 to change the process.

+1 to add scripts to the reviewer.

That is we improve the process of reviews. But I don't think we need to
change how this is released.




On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 12:36 PM Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> wrote:

> Just to be clear…
>
> This proposal creates more work for the release manager prior to starting
> the vote but in hopes of reducing the work for the reviewers.   It’s a bit
> more than a “mvn release:prepare ; man release:perform”.  Some of the extra
> work can obviously be scripted, but it is still a bit more to do.
>
> That said,  script provided to the reviewer could accomplish the same
> things using the current staging location/setup.
>
> Anyway, I’m -0 to the idea.    Getting folks to actually be a release
> manager is hard enough, why make it even more work.    Since I haven’t been
> a release manager for an ActiveMQ release in a while, I certainly wouldn’t
> hold up the idea though.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> > On Sep 12, 2017, at 9:49 AM, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemmell@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I mentioned on the recent Artemis 2.3.0 vote that I had some suggested
> > changes for the release process improvements, not just for Artemis but
> > for other components too, and would send a mail later.
> >
> > The short version is there are three main things I'd like to suggest
> > as improvements, both for folks testing+voting, and end users
> > downloading the release later:
> > - Using the dist dev repo for publishing bits for folks to test and vote
> on.
> > - Providing checksum files in the dist repo which verify more easily
> > with the related tools.
> > - Use SHA512 rather than SHA1 for checksums in the dist repo.
> >
> > # Dist dev repo for votes
> >
> > Currently the ActiveMQ votes for the Java components tend to link to
> > the artifacts in the nexus staging repo. I think using the dist dev
> > repo (https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/activemq/) to publish the
> > bits under vote would be an improvement. Its easy for folks to grab
> > all the files at once, helps ensure that what people test is actually
> > what will end up in the dist release repo later, and it simplifies the
> > eventual release step to a single svn remote copy command.
> >
> > # Provide more easily verifiable checksum files in dist release repo
> >
> > Currently, the checksum files provides in the dist release repo are
> > just the ones from nexus. These lack filename information and so you
> > cant verify them as easily with tools. Files which contain the
> > filename detail can be verified quickly and even grouped in a single
> > shot with the checksum tools, e.g "md5sum -c *.md5". For the MD5 and
> > SHA1 cases they could be prepared either by manipulating the existing
> > files taken from nexus to add the names, or simply generating the
> > checksums again with the tools and manually verifying them the same
> > way everyone currently needs to.
> >
> > # Provide SHA512 checksum files in the dist repo
> >
> > The release distribution policy has suggested using SHA512 for some
> > time now, I think it would be good to make the switch for the files
> > provided in the dist repo.
> > http://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution.html#sigs-and-sums
> >
> > Robbie
>
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>
> --
Clebert Suconic

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