Fixing this would improve our process, so I want to do something. I get stuck on the name ON_QA though. The Pulp3 release process is so different from the Pulp2 one, the label doesn't make as much sense to me for Pulp3. Is marking them as CLOSED - CURRENT RELEASE an option? Or maybe introducing a new label called PRE-RELEASE? For now we could use CURRENT RELEASE as a simple option until we get into the GA.
What do you think? On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 9:32 AM David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> wrote: > I noticed in redmine that it's impossible to track which issues have been > released in an RC vs what has been completed but not yet released. In both > cases, the status of these issues is MODIFIED. In Pulp 2, we set the status > to ON_QA when changes have been released in a beta[0]. I wonder if it would > make sense to set Pulp 3 issues to ON_QA once they have been released with > an RC? Would it make sense to start this practice with RC3? > > [0] > https://pulp.plan.io/projects/pulp/wiki/Pulp_2_Release_Planning#Beta-Announcing > > David > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:14 PM Brian Bouterse <bbout...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> The RC3 has several items on its blockers list [0], so we will not be >> releasing on Monday the 24th. The plan is to release when either the >> blockers are all resolved or on Friday the 28th, whichever comes first. Any >> remaining blockers will go onto an RC4 blockers list. >> >> # Plugin Updates Required >> One new issue #4990 [1] discussed today during open floor will require a >> small-but-necessary change for any plugin that implements on-demand >> policy='streamed' or policy='on_demand'. Specifically you'll need to >> override the 'policy' field on your detail Remote's serializer to allow for >> those values. #4990 will include these docs (likely done Mon/Tues), but I >> wanted to give a heads up. Without this change RC3 will break lazy for your >> users because they won't be able to make the Remote. >> >> Any feedback or ideas are welcome (either on list or off). >> >> [0]: https://etherpad.net/p/pulpcore_rc3_blocker_list >> [1]: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4990 >> >> Thanks! >> Brian >> >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 11:57 AM Brian Bouterse <bbout...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Next Thursday will be 1-month since the pulpcore and pulpcore-plugin rc2 >>> releases, so it's time to start coordinating rc3. Please give feedback on >>> any aspect here that could be improved. Feedback and changes are welcome. >>> >>> # rc3 timeline and blockers >>> I'm proposing June 24th as the rc3 release date. If there is some issue >>> you want to block pulpcore or pulpcore-plugin's rc3 release please add the >>> Redmine link onto this blockers etherpad: >>> https://etherpad.net/p/pulpcore_rc3_blocker_list >>> >>> # stable, committed migrations >>> Based on feedback with RC3 pulpcore and pulpcore-plugin will start >>> committing migrations and not modifying/rebasing them. We are asking plugin >>> writers to do the same. This will make consuming new release candidates >>> easier. It does not mean we are committing that a user could upgrade a RC >>> system to a GA system. >>> >>> # release notes >>> If you want the rc3 release notes to reflect a piece of work that does >>> not have an entry in the CHANGES directory, you can still add them. Put >>> your entries in the CHANGES directory. This should be true of your core and >>> also plugins who have adopted the towncrier tooling for release notes. >>> >>> # version in source >>> Users are becoming confused in the /status/ API about what bits they >>> have with source checkouts. To resolve this pulpcore and pulpcore-plugin >>> will contain the nextVersion.dev as its version going forward. So today >>> we're applying versions 3.0.0rc3.dev and 0.1.0rc3.dev to pulpcore and >>> pulpcore-plugin in source control respectively. We are asking plugin >>> writers to also adopt this approach. On release day we will will drop the >>> .dev, and then increment it to 3.0.0rc4.dev, etc. >>> >>> # releasing rc3 compatible plugins >>> I don't believe rc3 has any breaking changes in the plugin API requiring >>> significant updates. For your users to use the RC3, you'll need to ensure >>> your plugin's setup.py will allow that newer version to be installer. >>> Please reach out on-list or on IRC if you want any help with this. >>> >>> # exclusively importing from pulpcore.plugin >>> Please update your plugins to import from pulpcore.plugin exclusively. >>> Any import that imports from another package underneath pulpcore is not >>> part of the plugin API. For example imports 'from pulpcore.app.models >>> import X' should become 'from pulpcore.plugin.models import X'. this is >>> important to ensure we've got all the necessary objects plugins use >>> available via the plugin API. >>> >>> # When is GA? >>> There are issues being discovered by Katello as they integrate against >>> Pulp3. These usability issues also affect general Pulp users. It's nothing >>> epic, but the changes do produce small backwards incompatible changes. >>> We'll have more confidence once there are no open Katello integration >>> blockers. You can see that list here: https://tinyurl.com/y395d4gn >>> >>> Also the migration tooling plan is coming along very nicely, but going >>> to GA requires that work to have progressed further also (I feel). GA-ing >>> Pulp3 and then realizing we can't migrate pulp2 content effectively into it >>> would be good to avoid. >>> >>> Finally, the RPM plugin, the mainstay of Pulp2's usage, has a few >>> significant features to develop which could produce some not-insignificant >>> changes in core. One GA perspective is to wait on rpm to make those feature >>> and for katello to integrate those too to have full confidence Pulp3 is >>> ready for Katello. FWIW, those efforts are underway already. >>> >>> # Feedback >>> Please send it any way you feel comfortable. If you feel we're not doing >>> something right please tell us! >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Brian >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> Pulp-dev mailing list >> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >> >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
