Agree, you can start with [1] and [2] and give it a shot =)

[1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/release-java.html
[2] 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GORA/Apache+Gora+Release+Procedure+HOW_TO

On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Matt Franklin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Also, take a look at other project's documented release guides.  They are a
> good starting point.  Any specific questions, the mentors should be able to
> help you answer
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Henry Saputra <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> 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]
>> >>
>>

Reply via email to