airflow-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Nauroth <cnaur...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Airflow Release Planning and Supported Release Lifetime
Date Mon, 09 Jan 2017 18:39:45 GMT
I'm not aware of any strict rule that a release manager must be a
committer.  However, the activities of a product release almost always
involve things like tagging the source repository, so in practice, I've
always seen that the release manager is a committer on the project.


Chris Nauroth

On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Alex Van Boxel <alex@vanboxel.be> wrote:

> Thanks for clarifying (I'm new to this Apache releasing ;-)
>
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 6:58 PM Bolke de Bruin <bdbruin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > This would be for changes AFTER release / rc. Ie. an RC is basically what
> > we as a community deem stable and under normal circumstances is the equal
> > to the release. A release is done by a release manager (per Apache
> > guidelines) so it makes sense that a release manager can only apply
> patches
> > to a release. For this release I am the release manager.
> >
> > Alpha and beta versions are open to any committer.
> >
> > That's the idea which to me makes sense, but maybe an other option is
> > better?
> >
> > Bolke
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On 8 Jan 2017, at 18:27, Alex Van Boxel <alex@vanboxel.be> wrote:
> > >
> > > This looks good, except do we need a release manager that applies
> > patches?
> > >
> > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017, 14:36 Bolke de Bruin <bdbruin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi All,
> > >>
> > >> As part of the release process I have created "Airflow Release
> Planning
> > >> and Supported Release Lifetime” (
> > >>
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/
> Airflow+Release+Planning+and+Supported+Release+Lifetime
> > >> <
> > >>
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/
> Airflow+Release+Planning+and+Supported+Release+Lifetime
> > >).
> > >> I borrowed heavily from Samba’s Release Planning for this, so any
> > >> resemblance is not coincidental :-).
> > >>
> > >> Please take a look and make suggestions as not all may fit our rhythm.
> > >> Main take aways:
> > >>
> > >> * We aim to do a major release every 6 months (ie. 1.8 -> 1.9)
> > >> * Minor releases (1.8.0 -> 1.8.1) can happen whenever needed.
> > >> * We only support (“maintenance mode”) N-1. So if 1.9.0 is released,
> > 1.8.X
> > >> enters maintenance. 1.7.X is EOL’d.
> > >> * Patches to closed branches (ie. RC+) need to have a signoff from
> > another
> > >> committer and support from the mailinglist (Can this be done in the
> > Apache
> > >> way?). A release manager then needs to apply te patch.
> > >>
> > >> Other:
> > >> * Patches land on master first
> > >> * Branches are maintained as “vX.Y-test” and “vX.Y-stable”. No
minor
> > >> branches. Thus when 1.8.0 is released, this will be the stable branch
> > >> “v1.8-stable”, automatically “v1.8-test” becomes the to be 1.8.1
> > version.
> > >>
> > >> I hope this makes sense. Do we need to vote on this?
> > >>
> > >> Cheers
> > >> Bolke
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> --
>   _/
> _/ Alex Van Boxel
>

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