Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: 195.212.17.167 is neither permitted
 nor denied by domain of mark.hindess@googlemail.com)
Message-Id: <201003091538.o29Fcq8a023458@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com>
In-reply-to: <4B965407.8000609@gmail.com>
References: <201003011850.o21IoCcw018278@d06av04.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
 <201003052117.o25LHLmx014151@d12av01.megacenter.de.ibm.com>
 <25aac9fc1003051528k696407f1q198446e344cd1622@mail.gmail.com>
 <201003061127.o26BRZC4024716@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
 <25aac9fc1003060444j7b9b083fgdf5b2fb7b3dbfe6@mail.gmail.com>
 <201003062127.o26LR92D022306@d06av04.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
 <25aac9fc1003061424k3b553399pb22caa75b6d87487@mail.gmail.com>
 <201003091016.o29AGgig027606@d06av03.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
 <4B965407.8000609@gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
   message dated "Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:58:31 +0000."
From: Mark Hindess <mark.hindess@googlemail.com>
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Subject: [general] Release process (was [result][vote]Declare r917296 as
 6.0M1)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:38:52 +0000


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?

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.