geode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Huynh <jhu...@pivotal.io>
Subject Re: 1.9 release date
Date Sat, 02 Mar 2019 00:10:29 GMT
To Alexander's point, I'm use the latest geode snapshot and am seeing an
issue that looks similar to (if not the same as) GEODE-3780 (but this one
is closed).
I'd like to explore this a bit more and decide if that should be reopened
but I am not sure if it's not an issue important enough to wait for.

I think some soak time would be nice but I can understand that it's not a
clear criteria.

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 3:57 PM Sai Boorlagadda <sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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