HI Ankit, Yes I agree, it takes a bit of research to do first release.
I will create a wiki page with direct TODO steps for us new with ASF to be release manager. It will be sometimes this week and will send email to @dev list when it is ready. - Henry On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Ankit Kumar <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Henry, > > Thanks for sharing more info on the release process. > > My local git repository clone is building successfully with all tests > passing but I do not understand how/where to start. > > The process appears to be still quite a ceremony with lot of steps pretty > new to us. In order to bring more structure and clarity, could we please > make a TODO list with a bit of explanation on what is expected from that > TODO item. This will also help us divide work amongst the group (if needed) > and also as part of working on each TODO item we can also learn/document > the whole process nicely. > > I guess the TODO list should help a lot already but if needed can we also > have a skype call(with anyone who knows the process) to discuss/understand > in detail. > > Regards > Ankit > > > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Henry Saputra <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Marvin sent out good tips on how to get IPMC votes for releases under >> ASF incubator. >> >> - Henry >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Marvin Humphrey <[email protected]> >> Date: Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 9:22 AM >> Subject: [DISCUSS] Release of Apache Allura (incubating) v1.0.0 >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Rich Bowen <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hmm. Did we do something wrong with our call for vote? >> >> Perhaps not this one, though the voting on allura-dev@incubator was >> somewhat >> irregular. >> >> * No "[VOTE]" in the subject. >> * Spread out over multiple threads. >> * No time specification. (I recommend the phrase "at least 72 hours".) >> * PPMC votes claimed as "binding", which is ambiguous. >> >> So long as the IPMC VOTE clears, though, those irregularities don't block >> the >> release IMO. >> >> I'd also like to note that the dev list archives for Allura are >> time-consuming >> and tedious to plow through -- the signal-to-noise ratio is poor due to the >> large number of auto-generated messages with trivial content. >> >> > Can anyone suggest any reason why we've gotten ZERO response to this >> message >> > or to Dave's followup? >> >> Allura has four Mentors. You've voted, but where are the others? >> >> Mentors must lead the way, particularly for the first release. "Freelance" >> reviews of release artifacts, by IPMC members who are not following the >> podling's development, are by their nature superficial. For instance, a >> freelancer can run RAT and see whether there are files with missing ALv2 >> headers, but can't see whether files with ALv2 headers had them installed >> appropriately. We count on Mentors to endorse the podling's initial IP >> handling, from supervising the code grant to monitoring the dev list and >> commits list day-by-day and ensuring that everything is proper. >> >> After the first release, we are voting on a delta, and all new changes have >> happened within Apache channels which are comparatively more auditable. >> However, for the initial incubating release, we are voting on development >> which took place elsewhere, and Mentors have better insight than the rest >> of >> the IPMC into the importation and assimilation of that dark matter into >> Apache. >> >> > Can some of the old hands around here give us some insight into what we >> need >> > to do to get things moving? >> >> Getting enough IPMC votes for incubating releases is an age-old issue for >> the >> Incubator. Many long-term remedies have been discussed, but none of that >> will >> help the acute problem faced by Allura. >> >> In today's Incubator, the most effective strategy for an individual >> podling to >> take is for its core contributors to become serious experts about Apache IP >> and release policy and to present squeaky clean release candidates which >> make >> a best effort to follow all known rules and guidelines. In Allura's case, >> not >> only would it help to run the dev list VOTEs more cleanly, but it would >> help >> if PPMC members who vote +1 document exactly what steps they took to >> validate >> the release candidate. >> >> It's nice to see a list like this accompanying a +1 vote: >> >> * Sums and sigs OK (log below). >> * Build from source tarball succeeds and passes tests on [list >> platforms]. >> * Extended tests pass on [list platforms]. >> * RAT build target passes. >> * Tarball name contains "incubating". >> * Incubation DISCLAIMER included. >> * Expanded tarball matches version control tag exactly (diff log >> below). >> * LICENSE and NOTICE assembled according to >> <http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html> per discussion at >> [link]. >> * LICENSE and NOTICE up-to-date, as no dependencies have been added >> since initial assembly. >> * All copyleft dependencies purged as documented at [issue]. >> * Copyright date in NOTICE is current. >> * CHANGES entry is current. >> * Issue tracker clean (no open issues for this release). >> ... >> >> Documented diligence by podling contributors lowers the cost of reviewing >> and >> voting for Mentors and other IPMC members, and may help to persuade those >> hanging back to participate. >> >> Marvin Humphrey >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>
