corinthia-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gabriela Gibson <>
Subject Do we have/want a check list for releases?
Date Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:37:20 GMT
On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Andrea Pescetti <> wrote:

<snipped some complex procedural discussion>

> It is not mandatory, but very useful (and I would
> make a recommendation out of it) that when voting on a release one doesn't
> simply cast a +1 as such.
> I mean, of course a -1 must always be explained, but a +1 should be
> explained too, like this:
> "+1 Built source on Windows, checked README files, checked ALv2 headers"
> "+1 Did only a cursory review but I trust you guys on the code"
> and so on.
> Remember, the PPMC is assumed (whether this is written somewhere or not) to
> give a +1 based on (mainly) technical reasons; the IPMC will take this for
> granted and (broadly speaking) mainly look for compliance issues. If from
> the set of PPMC votes the Release Manager can understand, for example, that
> no testing at all was done on Linux, he may decide to extend the VOTE until
> Linux gets proper coverage; if the PPMC members do not supply this
> information, we can't know what was tested and what not.
> So, Jan's question was not for me, but in terms of the "proper technical
> review" it would help to see VOTE e-mails more informative than a simple +1,
> so that one can be sure that all areas are covered.
> [Feel free to quote/forward this message in public]
> Regards,
>   Andrea.

This makes me think that perhaps having an official check list to
ensure that nothing gets forgotten and to make the splitting of the
large task that a release is easy and focus resources more efficiently
may be a very useful tool to have.

What do other projects do in this regard?

Visit my Coding Diary:

View raw message