harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nathan Beyer <ndbe...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [general] Release process (was [result][vote]Declare r917296 as 6.0M1)
Date Wed, 10 Mar 2010 00:15:30 GMT
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Mark Hindess
<mark.hindess@googlemail.com> wrote:
> In message <4B965407.8000609@gmail.com>, Tim Ellison writes:
>> I appreciate sebb's review and comments.  It would have been good to
>> hear them during the two week freeze leading up to the vote rather
>> than after the vote was concluded :-)
> This comment isn't entirely fair.  Sebb's initial review comments
> were about the binaries which we only created after the release was
> "completed".  This is one reason why I had more sympathy for his view
> that the release should be cancelled.
> I also appreciate sebb's comments.  So, while he could have made them
> by building our source and reviewing the resulting binaries, perhaps we
> should attempt to make this kind of review easier?

Don't we have binary builds coming out of Hudson periodically?

> It is tricky to see how to do this while still placing the emphasis on
> voting on source releases.
> It would be more work but perhaps we should create "minimal" binaries
> (one hdk bundle should be sufficient perhaps one windows and one linux)
> at the start of the feature freeze period?
> Any thoughts?
> Regards,
>  Mark.

View raw message