db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lily Wei <lilyweide...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: DERBY 10.9.2 release, was: DERBY release
Date Fri, 01 Feb 2013 17:34:48 GMT
Thanks Kathey and Rick for writing up the details and answering. I only
have the option to do the build on Windows. So, please bear with me.
Overall, I do feel the process is moved the complexity around and beyond.

Personally, I am really glad we start to look into this.

Looking forward to making this a easier process for all the Derby users,


On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Katherine Marsden <
kmarsdenderby@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> On 1/31/2013 10:19 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote:
>> Hi Lily,
>> I think you're talking about a 10.9.2 release. Can you let us know which
>> parts of the release instructions seem more complicated? I can help improve
>> the instructions if you let me know which parts are most confusing.
>>  I think in terms of the documentation (and the process)  I noticed
> several  major themes in my failed attempts to put a release together.  I
> am sorry I did not take better notes in detail.
> 1) The process seems fragile on Windows.
> DERBY-5461, DERBY-5463, DERBY-5460 and difficulty integrating an md5sum
> tool combined with the chaining of steps together and problems restarting
> if something fail due to the  made my build something of a patch work
> effort, but I did get it out  by working around these issues.  On the
> publication, there is was trouble on windows due to line endings. I don't
> really like the fact that it tried to svn commit without letting me review
> my change.
> 2)  It would be good to make the documentation more concise.
> It is somewhat  long, winding and repetitive. There is not a clear
> numbering system for the steps and  I found I would struggle through with a
> step that was briefly mentioned only to find I should have done it later
> and was  given more detailed  information.   The interleaving of
> instructions from old releases makes it confusing too. I think it would be
> ok to just take this out prior to 10.9, but have to admit sometimes having
> the old instructions was helpful in moving forward.
> 3)The process itself seems more complicated and extensive.
>  Maybe this is again just a function of one and two and the fact that
> every time I got an afternoon to look at it, I would collide with something
> else,  but the process itself seems to have become more complicated and
> extensive. (was it 22 pages vs 4 or 5 when I did a 10.5 release?)
> I would say at least stay away from Windows if trying to make a release,
> but I don't think  that is an option for Lily.
> Best
> Kathey
>  Thanks,
>> -Rick
>> On 1/31/13 9:51 AM, Lily Wei wrote:
>>> Hi:
>>> The release process and procedure had definitely turns out to be more
>>> involved than I participated. Compare to the previous release I did, I have
>>> to say I am having problem just follow the instruction.
>>> Derby is a wonderful product and technology to be more involved.
>>> Therefore, I am seeking help from Derby developers. If I can do the build
>>> for, can someone else help me with publishing and rest of the
>>> tasks? For a minimum, we definitely should have clear instruction for more
>>> Derby developers to follow. Hopefully, easy to follow steps and procedure
>>> can proceed most of the time.
>>> Any suggestion is welcome.
>>> Thank you so much,
>>> Lily

View raw message