Great :-) Not sure if you've seen it but I put together lots of notes on the release at https://brooklyn.incubator.apache.org/developers/committers/release-process/index.html and I'll try to be on Gitter/IRC as much as I can.
There's also some helpers including a Vagrant setup in the `release` folder of the repo. Richard. On 2 September 2015 at 09:20, Alex Heneveld <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Richard, > > Agree we should address the issues Hadrian dug up. (Thanks Hadrian!) I'm > working on this. > > I've done a last call for important PR's. > > It looks like Apple are going to give me a loaner machine so I can be > RM/shepherd. > > Best > Alex > > > On 2 September 2015 at 09:16, Richard Downer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Alex, I'm afraid I won't have bandwidth to shepherd a release this week. >> >> We should also address the IPMC notes on our last release, and do a >> last call on this list for important PRs. I might then be able to RM >> next week. >> >> Richard. >> >> On 1 September 2015 at 22:28, Alex Heneveld >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > @Richard - It was my plan to be RM but #fail. Could you? (My attempts >> > seem like they've fried my GPU about 3 hours ago. Maven and Mavericks >> are >> > definitely not friends. To be fair it looks like this is a known problem >> > with the 2012 MBPr's.) >> > >> > I've made the branches, dunno how far it got uploading builds. >> > >> > @Hadrian- That would be helpful! >> > >> > Best >> > Alex >> > >> > >> > On 1 September 2015 at 21:46, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> We also need to make sure we incorporate all the feedback from the >> >> incubator vote on the previous release. I will go through it again this >> >> evening. >> >> >> >> Hadrian >> >> >> >> >> >> On 09/01/2015 03:53 PM, Richard Downer wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hi Alex, >> >>> >> >>> Are you up for being RM for this one? >> >>> >> >>> Richard. >> >>> >> >>> On 1 September 2015 at 17:03, Alex Heneveld >> >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Hi all- >> >>>> >> >>>> +1 to no need for milestones. There are quite a few goodies in any >> case >> >>>> beyond the package refactoring which is huge! See them here: >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> https://brooklyn.incubator.apache.org/v/0.8.0-SNAPSHOT/misc/release-notes.html >> >>>> >> >>>> [still uploading so you may have to wait a bit] >> >>>> >> >>>> I've compiled new release notes and uploaded updated snapshot docs. >> This >> >>>> includes updated catalog items and javadocs. I've also made the >> >>>> downloads >> >>>> and versions more prominent (and fixed broken links), completed >> >>>> persistence >> >>>> compatibility for the package refactoring (#873), and merged a few >> other >> >>>> PR's outstanding. >> >>>> >> >>>> The release notes include a MIGRATION GUIDE, linked from above. >> >>>> >> >>>> If there are any last comments, or other NEW FEATURES deserve a >> mention, >> >>>> speak up. >> >>>> >> >>>> Otherwise roll on 0.8.0-RC1 ! >> >>>> >> >>>> Best >> >>>> Alex >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> On 01/09/2015 08:54, Richard Downer wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> I'd be in favour of 0.8.0. It'd be great to iterate much faster on >> >>>>> releases. I assume under semantic versioning that we don't have to >> >>>>> stop when we reach 0.9 :-) >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Richard. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On 31 August 2015 at 18:56, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> +1 for 0.8.0. I don't see a lot of value in a milestone release at >> this >> >>>>>> point. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Alex, re: package split, I don't think so, but even if we discover >> >>>>>> something >> >>>>>> it shouldn't be a blocker. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Hadrian >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On 08/31/2015 12:55 PM, Aled Sage wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> +1 >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> We should aim for a 0.8.0 release candidate soon as well. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> What else do we need after an M1 before we can have 0.8.0? Should >> we >> >>>>>>> just go straight for 0.8.0?! >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Aled >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On 31/08/2015 17:31, Alex Heneveld wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Hi folks, >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Now that the package rename is pretty much done, I'd like to get >> an >> >>>>>>>> 080-M1 out, maybe kick this off tomorrow? >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> This will be nice for users who have been disrupted by the >> rename!! >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> With #873 ready for review we can even offer backwards >> compatibility >> >>>>>>>> for persisted state, although any user java code will have to have >> >>>>>>>> imports optimized (or if you prefer, run a `sed -i` over the code >> >>>>>>>> based on `deserializedClassRenames.properties` -- we should >> document >> >>>>>>>> this in the release notes -- any volunteers for that?). >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> We'll go through the existing PR's and finish the scan of >> plans/docs >> >>>>>>>> (as discussed at #873), but if there are any other pieces of work >> let >> >>>>>>>> us know. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> @Hadrian -- are there more renames to come to remove the OSGi >> split >> >>>>>>>> packages? >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Best >> >>>>>>>> Alex >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> -- >> >>>> Cloudsoft Corporation Limited, Registered in Scotland No: SC349230. >> >>>> Registered Office: 13 Dryden Place, Edinburgh, EH9 1RP >> >>>> >> >>>> This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the addressee >> only. If >> >>>> the message is received by anyone other than the addressee, please >> return >> >>>> the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the >> message >> >>>> from >> >>>> your computer. Internet e-mails are not necessarily secure. Cloudsoft >> >>>> Corporation Limited does not accept responsibility for changes made to >> >>>> this >> >>>> message after it was sent. >> >>>> >> >>>> Whilst all reasonable care has been taken to avoid the transmission of >> >>>> viruses, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that the >> >>>> onward >> >>>> transmission, opening or use of this message and any attachments will >> not >> >>>> adversely affect its systems or data. No responsibility is accepted by >> >>>> Cloudsoft Corporation Limited in this regard and the recipient should >> >>>> carry >> >>>> out such virus and other checks as it considers appropriate. >> >>>> >> >>> >> > >> > -- >> > Cloudsoft Corporation Limited, Registered in Scotland No: SC349230. >> > Registered Office: 13 Dryden Place, Edinburgh, EH9 1RP >> > >> > This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If >> > the message is received by anyone other than the addressee, please return >> > the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message >> > from your computer. Internet e-mails are not necessarily secure. >> Cloudsoft >> > Corporation Limited does not accept responsibility for changes made to >> this >> > message after it was sent. >> > >> > Whilst all reasonable care has been taken to avoid the transmission of >> > viruses, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that the >> > onward transmission, opening or use of this message and any attachments >> > will not adversely affect its systems or data. No responsibility is >> > accepted by Cloudsoft Corporation Limited in this regard and the >> recipient >> > should carry out such virus and other checks as it considers appropriate. >> > > -- > Cloudsoft Corporation Limited, Registered in Scotland No: SC349230. > Registered Office: 13 Dryden Place, Edinburgh, EH9 1RP > > This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If > the message is received by anyone other than the addressee, please return > the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message > from your computer. Internet e-mails are not necessarily secure. Cloudsoft > Corporation Limited does not accept responsibility for changes made to this > message after it was sent. > > Whilst all reasonable care has been taken to avoid the transmission of > viruses, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that the > onward transmission, opening or use of this message and any attachments > will not adversely affect its systems or data. No responsibility is > accepted by Cloudsoft Corporation Limited in this regard and the recipient > should carry out such virus and other checks as it considers appropriate.
