incubator-kato-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Burrell Donkin <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Happy New Year - and what do we do next?
Date Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:27:38 GMT
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com> wrote:

<snip>

>> Quoting Robert Donkin from the 14th December:
>>
>> "i've been floating the idea of a multi-stage audit to try to help
>> podlings pass the technical side of their first release without too
>> much pain. fancy trying it out?"
>>
>> I replied yes, it sounded like a good idea, but we've still to get details
>> of what that involves.
>
> I'm not sure either. Robert is busy with some schoolwork so you might
> inquire on the incubator list to see if he's communicated his ideas more
> widely. I don't recall any details.

given a project that's ready for it's first release (for example, have
a working, documented and reliable build) there isn't any real need to
actually produce an artifact using the full release process for most
of the problems to be ironed out. most of the areas where podlings
find difficulties could be reviewed long before the release but for
this to work someone who's done a lot of review would need enough time
to reach consensus on fully documented guidelines for these prior
review processed.

the basic idea is that:

* reviewing the source for license type issues can be done from the source
* if a podling wants to release a binary then the release process
needs to be replicatable and documented. if it is then anyone should
be able to build a sample binary release from the source and check the
basic stuff podlings usually fall down on.

once the podling understands how to do that stuff right, then the
final bit of the jigsaw is understanding the voting process.

- robert

Mime
View raw message