db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Changes to the release process?
Date Mon, 14 Apr 2008 15:43:05 GMT
Thanks for this analysis, Dyre. I agree that we should not create extra 
release steps this late in the process.

I agree that in the future, it would be great to garner more user 
feedback on vetted beta distributions. I recommend that we look outside 
the  Derby community for examples of how other open source projects 
gather this feedback.

In general, the scope of release testing seems to be narrowing. We seem 
to be on a downward trajectory in terms of the buddy testing which we 
are seeing on our releases. Here are the buddy testing pages from the 
past several releases:

10.2: http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/TenTwoBuddyTesting

10.3: http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/TenThreeBuddyTesting

10.4: http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/TenFourBuddyTesting


Dyre.Tjeldvoll@Sun.COM wrote:
> In another email I have asked the community to vote on the latest 10.4
> release candidate. I realize that some people have expressed concern
> that this will not let the new release be adequately exposed to the user
> community, and I think that this is a valid point. But I would like to
> finish this release following the existing release process. I'm very
> uncomfortable with the idea of adding new steps at this stage,
> especially if those steps will increase the time it takes to get the
> release out.
> For future releases, I think it would be good to have a discussion about
> how the release process can be changed to more actively engage the user
> community while at the same time adhering to the Apache
> rules/guidelines. 
> One possible solution could be to create (with a vote) a formal beta
> release that users can test, and then create (with a vote) a proper
> release based on feedback from from users.
> The main challenge that I see with this approach is that, based on past
> experience, the time between the beta and the formal release must be
> rather long, since it takes time before the user community starts using
> any new release. Add to that the time needed to address the issues
> discovered while vetting the beta, and you get an (IMO) very long
> release cycle. But maybe there are ways around this?

View raw message