On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:01 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> On 8/9/12 4:39 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: > > Hi Jürgen, > > > > On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 01:33:29PM +0200, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > >> I would like to propose now a new snapshot build based revision > >> 1371068 (tel:1371068). > > > > -1 > > > > Didn't the last build show us that it is really a bad idea to propose > > one build just because there is a fix for a release blocker? Browse the > > archive looking for the rev. number to get a timeline idea: > > > > 1367440 > > 1367911 > > 1368799 > > 1368968 > > 1369110 > > 1369843 > > > > A small resume: Rob's finding the missing update setting, Josef finding > > two issues on Sunday, even before the RC was announced on Monday; a new > > RC for those two fixes on Tuesday; now there is a fix, so yet another > > RC... What if another release blockers are found tomorrow? Yet another > > RC on Friday if the fix is available? > > First of all I already mentioned that I would change some things when I > again would act as release manager. I would indeed expand the timeframes > between more official snapshot builds. But not only this. > > We did official snapshots over some weeks and it seems that these > snapshot were not tested very well. Some of the issue were there and > were already in 3.4. > > Some of the issues were of course introduced by other fixes that were > not tested careful enough. But that happened and everybody can try to > improve the own work to reduce such things. But more important is that > we improve the communication and coordinate the testing efforts better. > > I was also not very happy this time and I already mentioned that I > wanted too much. But we agreed more or less on a release date end of > July. And it looked not bad, all critical and marked blocker issues were > fixed. And I simply tried to bring the release out, failed and learned > my lesson ;-) > Juergen -- In my opinion, you are doing a great job as release manager. And yes, you are correct that some of these misfires were caused by inadequate testing of preliminary 3.4.1 releases starting from at least a month ago. As we went along and I looked at the weekly reports that were supplied by QA, I didn't feel the fixes warranted an additional download, and so I did nothing. Maybe others felt the same, and we didn't do enough testing. Consequently, some issues were evident until very late -- a week or so ago. I appreciate your perspectives on all of this. We do need to put more effort into diligent testing AND communication. > Some of the issues who resulted in a new snapshot had nothing to do with > the office but more with pro-active actions towards graduation. > > > > > > In the meantime, I propose > > > > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120518 > > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120389 > > > > Crash bug 120389 has been reported on 2012-07-27, nobody notice it until > > the user made some noise. This shows that something is really not > > working with the way RC are proposed right after a fix is found for > > a release blocker, IMHO there should be enough time (a week, for > > example) to test the RC, even if a release blocker is detected, because > > nothing prevent this from finding another release blocker. > > > > I wouldn't have requested a new build when I would have seen this issues > before. > The bad things here is that we haven't noticed this critical issue for > 10 days which is of course not good. But everybody who noticed such > things can raise the fingers and can point others to such things. > > We should now really focus to fix the problems and bring 3.4.1 on the > road as soon as possible. > > After the release is in front of the next release and we can reflect > what went wrong or not so good and what can we improve and how. > > One thing is very clear we need working build bots. To reduce the > workload for those who do the builds and make it more independent from > single persons. And to provide regular builds for continuous testing and > verifying. > > Juergen > > > > > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MzK "Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think." -- Niels Bohr
