On 9 April 2012 17:24, Franklin, Matthew B. <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 4/9/12 11:10 AM, "Jasha Joachimsthal" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >On 9 April 2012 15:51, Franklin, Matthew B. <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> On 4/9/12 9:46 AM, "Raminderjeet Singh" <[email protected]> > >>wrote: > >> > >> >As the fix is already part of trunk and we did not create any branch so > >> >what should i do to create build. Shall i create a tag 0.10.1 from > >>trunk > >> >and create the release. As the trunk pom's are already at > >>0.11-snaphot, i > >> >need to careful not to update them again i release process. > >> > >> Since the fix is in place in trunk, IMO we no longer need to branch. > >>You > >> could release 0.10.1 right now out of trunk without any need to change > >> poms. Just make sure you set the development version to 0.11-SNAPSHOT > >> when prompted by the release plugin... > >> > > > >Should we create a 0.10.1 version in Jira as well? > > +1 > Created and added it as fix version for RAVE-541, RAVE-542 and RAVE-553. > > > > > > >> > >> > > >> > > >> >Thanks > >> >Raminder > >> > > >> > > >> >On Apr 9, 2012, at 6:46 AM, Jasha Joachimsthal wrote: > >> > > >> >> Tested the portal and it works again. Thanks for fixing it. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On 6 April 2012 20:37, Mahadevan, Venkat <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> Fixed the issue. Please let me know otherwise. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> Venkat > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> On 4/6/12 9:19 AM, "Mahadevan, Venkat" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> Jasha, I will work on RAVE-541 and fix the issue > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On 4/6/12 6:26 AM, "Jasha Joachimsthal" > >><[email protected]> > >> >>>> wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>>> On 6 April 2012 10:46, Ate Douma <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>>> On 04/06/2012 10:41 AM, Ate Douma wrote: > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> I've got two remarks so far: > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> a) This release candidate is dependent on the non-yet released > >> >>>>>>> rave-master-0.10, > >> >>>>>>> which I don't like much. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> IMO it would have been better to wait another day until the > >> >>>>>>> rave-master > >> >>>>>>> was > >> >>>>>>> formally released. Although the rave-master release most > >>certainly > >> >>>>>>> will > >> >>>>>>> commence, in theory if we find a last minute blocker issue with > >>it > >> >>>>>>> causing its > >> >>>>>>> release to be failed, it would cause *this* release candidate > >>then > >> >>>>>>>to > >> >>>>>>> fail > >> >>>>>>> automatically as well... > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> b) Issue RAVE-553 just reported by Jasha and also confirmed by > >> >>>>>>>myself > >> >>>>>>> makes the > >> >>>>>>> release useless for all practical use-cases and most certainly > >> >>>>>>>should > >> >>>>>>> have been > >> >>>>>>> easily tested/found before the release. We should look into > >> >>>>>>>improving > >> >>>>>>> our > >> >>>>>>> quality assurance and add some minimal but sensible > >>(interaction) > >> >>>>>>> testing > >> >>>>>>> plan > >> >>>>>>> which should pass before we cut a release candidate because > >>this is > >> >>>>>>> quite > >> >>>>>>> annoying. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> For b) I'm inclined to vote -1 or at least -0. As I haven't had > >> >>>>>>>time > >> >>>>>>> to > >> >>>>>>> further > >> >>>>>>> review I'll postpone casting my vote for now but it doesn't look > >> >>>>>>>rosy > >> >>>>>>> to > >> >>>>>>> me. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> BTW: just want to make clear, especially for Raminder, I > >>consider b) > >> >>>>>> and > >> >>>>>> the need for improving on our quality assurance a responsibility > >>of > >> >>>>>>the > >> >>>>>> team, including myself, not one of the release-manager who but > >>must > >> >>>>>> execute > >> >>>>>> and ascertain this. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> If I revert the commit in > >> >>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-541 > >> >>>>> I > >> >>>>> can create new users again. I don't know what the intention of > >>this > >> >>>>> feature > >> >>>>> was, but the result is that it creates a new PROFILE page instead > >>of > >> >>>>>a > >> >>>>> new > >> >>>>> USER page. The portal cannot handle a user without a user page. > >>The > >> >>>>> portal > >> >>>>> can however render a profile page if no profile page is present > >>yet > >> >>>>>for > >> >>>>> that user. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> We have multiple options: > >> >>>>> 0. accept the 0.10 release, but I also doubt between -0 and -1 > >> >>>>> 1. reject the 0.10 release, fix or revert the issue, no new > >>release > >> >>>>>until > >> >>>>> the end of the month > >> >>>>> 2. reject the 0.10 release, revert the commit done for RAVE-541 > >>and > >> >>>>> create > >> >>>>> a new 0.10.1 release after the rave-master pom has been released > >> >>>>> 3. reject the 0.10 release, fix the RAVE-541 issue and create a > >>new > >> >>>>> 0.10.1 > >> >>>>> release after the rave-master pom has been released > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> For option 2 & 3 we don't want other new features in the 0.10.1 > >> >>>>>release > >> >>>>> so > >> >>>>> either > >> >>>>> a. hold all commits until the issue RAVE-541 has been resolved or > >> >>>>> reverted. > >> >>>>> Create a release from trunk (0.11-SNAPSHOT -> 0.10.1 -> > >> >>>>>0.11-SNAPSHOT) > >> >>>>> b. create a branch from 0.10 tag (0.10.1-SNAPSHOT), fix or revert > >> >>>>> RAVE-541, > >> >>>>> release from the branch (0.10.1-SNAPSHOT -> 0.10.1 -> > >> >>>>>0.10.2-SNAPSHOT). > >> >>>>> Merge the fix into trunk (0.11-SNAPSHOT) > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> @Venkat (or whoever can fix the issue and knows what the intention > >> >>>>>was): > >> >>>>> in > >> >>>>> case we want a 0.10.1 release, do you think you can fix this issue > >> >>>>>soon, > >> >>>>> shall we first revert your commit and give you more time to solve > >>it? > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Jasha > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Ate > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> On 04/06/2012 02:51 AM, Raminderjeet Singh wrote: > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> This is discussion thread for vote on Apache Rave Project 0.10 > >> >>>>>>>> Release > >> >>>>>>>> Candidate > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> For more information on the release process, checkout - > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> http://rave.apache.org/**release-management.html< > >> >>> http://rave.apache.or > >> >>>>>>>> g > >> >>>>>>>> /release-management.html> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> Some of the things to check before voting are: > >> >>>>>>>> - can you run the demo binaries > >> >>>>>>>> - can you build the contents of source-release.zip and svn tag > >> >>>>>>>> - do all of the staged jars/zips contain the required LICENSE, > >> >>>>>>>>NOTICE > >> >>>>>>>> and > >> >>>>>>>> DISCLAIMER files > >> >>>>>>>> - are all of the staged jars signed and the signature > >>verifiable > >> >>>>>>>> - is the signing key in the project's KEYS file and on a public > >> >>>>>>>> server > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> > > >> > >> > >
