I'm obviously a +1 and highly support this idea. On Mar 13, 2014 9:57 AM, "Naik, Archana" <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 I like the idea too. I have never done a release and don't mind being a > guinea pig hereŠ :) > > Archana > > On 3/13/14 9:44 AM, "Michal Mocny" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >+1, like the idea of putting your name into a hat. > > > >How about "coaching" the first time someone does a release? Do we prefer > >to let the docs stand for themselves? > > > >-Michal > > > > > >On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Andrew Grieve > ><[email protected]>wrote: > > > >> I'd previously brought up the idea of "Release Masters", and now after > >>the > >> recent highlight of our release process by other Apache project members, > >> I've learned that they are common, and are actually called "Release > >> Managers". > >> > >> Their role, in a nutshell, is to take ownership of a release (either > >> through delegation, or by doing it themselves). > >> > >> It's generally not a glorious job, so it would be great if we could do a > >> bit of a rotation on it: > >> - a rotation for tools, > >> - a rotation for plugins, > >> - a rotation for platforms release. > >> > >> For tools & plugins, the responsibility is a bit better defined I think > >>- > >> they are responsible for going through the steps in the release process. > >> > >> For platform releases, the release manager wouldn't necessarily be > >> responsible for individual platforms, but rather for things like docs, > >> website, dist/, and for poking people. > >> > >> > >> As for a rotation, one thought is to write down the names of those > >>willing > >> in the actual release steps .md files, and then they can plan out how to > >> schedule themselves from there. > >> > >> How does this sound? > >> > >
