geode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sai Boorlagadda <sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 1.9 release date
Date Fri, 01 Mar 2019 23:57:38 GMT
I started working on LICENSE issues.

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 3:55 PM Anthony Baker <abaker@pivotal.io> wrote:

> I’ll point out that the license issue I mentioned earlier this week isn’t
> resolved.  And that we’re bundling potentially incompatible Jackson jars.
>
> Anthony
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 2019, at 3:41 PM, Alexander Murmann <ajmurmann@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Clear quality metrics is definitely great. However, we've also seen in
> the
> > past that we sometimes find new issues by continue work on the code and
> > some folks starting to use them on their own projects. For that reason, I
> > think it might be wise to give ourselves some extra time to run into
> issues
> > organically. Maybe we don't need that as our coverage improves.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 3:24 PM Owen Nichols <onichols@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> >> The release criteria of “based on meeting quality goals” sounds great.
> >>
> >> What are those quality goals exactly, and can we objectively measure
> >> progress against them?
> >>
> >> It looks like we already have a number of well-defined quality goals in
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Release+process <
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Release+process>
> >> Presuming this is up-to-date, we need to satisfy 8 required quality
> goals
> >> before we can release.
> >>
> >> Thus far, we have not met the goal "Build is successful including
> >> automated tests”.
> >> To meet it, is one “all green" run in the release pipeline <
> >>
> https://concourse.apachegeode-ci.info/teams/main/pipelines/apache-release-1-9-0-main?groups=complete
> >
> >> sufficient?  Or should we require 2 or 3 “all green” runs on the same
> SHA?
> >>
> >> Do Windows tests count toward “all green”?  Currently they are not in
> the
> >> default view (same as 1.8.0).
> >>
> >> The Geode release process document above also lists an additional 11
> >> quality goals as “optional.”  I assume these are meant as suggestions
> the
> >> community may wish to consider when voting on a release?
> >>
> >> If anyone feels the existing release process documentation does not
> >> adequately define what quality goals must be met in order to release,
> let’s
> >> discuss (and get those docs updated!)
> >>
> >> -Owen
> >>
> >>> On Mar 1, 2019, at 8:02 AM, Anthony Baker <abaker@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> IMHO we start release work based on a quarterly schedule and we finish
> >> it based on meeting quality goals.  So right now I’m less worried about
> >> when the release will be done (because uncertainty) and more focused on
> >> ensuring we have demonstrated stability on the release branch.
> Hopefully
> >> that will happen sooner than 4/1…but it could take longer too.
> >>>
> >>> Anthony
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Feb 28, 2019, at 6:00 PM, Alexander Murmann <amurmann@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi everyone,
> >>>>
> >>>> According to our wiki we were aiming for a March 1st release date for
> >> our
> >>>> 1.9 release. We cut the release branch about two weeks late and see
> >> unusual
> >>>> amounts of merges still going into the branch. I propose that we give
> >>>> ourselves some more time to validate what's there. My proposal is to
> aim
> >>>> for last week of March or maybe even week of April 1st.
> >>>>
> >>>> What do you all think?
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Alexander J. Murmann
> > (650) 283-1933
>
>

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