> Maybe we'd better move the release process doc and validation doc > to the codebase, not the wiki pages.
IMO, we can move all contributor documentation and committers documentation to codebase. One example is that `pool.sks-keyservers.net` in [1] seems not available anymore, but I am not that confident enough to edit it directly. > And another point is can we have an automatic validation program to reduce > the burden on validators? I am in favour of this idea. At least some of the validations can be done automatically, like checking GPG signatures. Or we can just run some part of the integration CI process on the release artifacts. And furthermore, I think we can consider using a BOT (like Github Action) to make the release candidates. The following release steps require quite a lot of time and a stable network. - 3.1 Build RPM and DEB packages - 4. Sign and stage the artifacts - 5. Stage artifacts in maven I believe once we make the release process easier, our future version releases will be on time more often. [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Create-GPG-keys-to-sign-release-artifacts BR, Haiting On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 6:12 PM PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org> wrote: > Thanks for raising this question. > > Maybe we'd better move the release process doc and validation doc > to the codebase, not the wiki pages. > > - Only committers can update the wiki pages > - The changes without review > > After moving to the pulsar codebase > > - Everyone can contribute to the validation doc > - The release process doc update can get reviewers to review > > I think there are multiple issues that need to be resolved for the release > process > > - Have the Python client(Linux, osx) at the RC stage, I think currently we > only have the C++ client for RC, but push to pypi after the RC gets passed > - Add validation process for the Python and C++ client > - Add the Go function and Python function validation process > - Add a script for building images for RC > - Add images validation process > > And another point is can we have an automatic validation program to reduce > the burden on validators? > I'm not sure if it is acceptable. > > Thanks, > Penghui > > On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 4:50 PM Haiting Jiang <jianghait...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > the 7th step is "Write release notes", should we execute this > > > step later? > > > > From what I see, the release note can be postponed after the voting > > process. > > And it's not part of the voting content and does not affect whether we > > should cut a new release candidate. > > > > > In addition, I found the previous candidate [2] includes the docker > > > images, which is not included in the template of the 8th step "Run the > > > vote". It seems to be the 10th step "Publish Docker Images". > > > > Confused +1, If we do add docker image as part of release vote, we should > > also add validation method in [1] > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-Candidate-Validation > > > > Thanks, > > Haiting > > > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 9:49 PM Yunze Xu <y...@streamnative.io.invalid> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Recently I'm working on the release of 2.8.4 and it's near the vote of > > > the 1st candidate but I have some questions. > > > > > > From the tutorial [1] we can see, the 8th step is "Run the vote". > > > However, the 7th step is "Write release notes", should we execute this > > > step later? I see the 16th step is also "Write release notes" but the > > > 16th step at the beginning of "Release workflow" section is "Update > > > the site". > > > > > > In addition, I found the previous candidate [2] includes the docker > > > images, which is not included in the template of the 8th step "Run the > > > vote". It seems to be the 10th step "Publish Docker Images". > > > > > > It seems that the documents are not maintained well, which really > > > makes me confused. Therefore, before voting for the 1st candidate, I > > > want to get some clarifications from the mail list. > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-process > > > [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/q0g5ko617rb77b1wqpxy94ks5mq48d88 > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Yunze > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
