Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On Feb 27, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Filipe David Manana wrote: > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:22 AM, J Chris Anderson wrote: > >> >> On Feb 26, 2010, at 7:00 AM, Filipe David Manana wrote: >> >>> I would still like to see ticket 639 in 0.11. >>> >> >> I'm reading 639 and it seems like a great patch. But it's a little bit big >> and I can't tell for certain that there isn't something subtle I'm not >> seeing. I think the best course of action would be to apply it just after >> the 0.11 release, so it gets some field testing before it goes out in a >> release. >> >> It's not a new feature so it is still a candidate for 0.11.1 / 1.0. I'd >> just feel better about introducing a large patch to the code base if it has >> time to get used in a few different settings before being baked into a >> release. >> > > True, it's a little bit big. > In that case I don't mind having it in a 0.11.1 release. > > cheers Sorry, I didn't get around to reviewing 639 till today, but it's in trunk now. Cheers, Adam
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:22 AM, J Chris Anderson wrote: > > On Feb 26, 2010, at 7:00 AM, Filipe David Manana wrote: > > > I would still like to see ticket 639 in 0.11. > > > > I'm reading 639 and it seems like a great patch. But it's a little bit big > and I can't tell for certain that there isn't something subtle I'm not > seeing. I think the best course of action would be to apply it just after > the 0.11 release, so it gets some field testing before it goes out in a > release. > > It's not a new feature so it is still a candidate for 0.11.1 / 1.0. I'd > just feel better about introducing a large patch to the code base if it has > time to get used in a few different settings before being baked into a > release. > True, it's a little bit big. In that case I don't mind having it in a 0.11.1 release. cheers > > Chris > > > Adam told me, via IRC, he will review the patch by the end of this week. > > > > I vote +1 on it. > > > > cheers > > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Noah Slater > wrote: > > > >> Nope, you can send payment to any email. > >> > >> As long as the recipient can click on the link in the email, they can > >> deposit it into any account. > >> > >> On 26 Feb 2010, at 14:37, till wrote: > >> > >>> I always knew secretly open source worked like that. ;) > >>> > >>> Btw, I know it's not so subtle, but you need to include your paypal > >> email... :D > >>> > >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ui86peQZ74s > >>> > >>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Noah Slater > >> wrote: > For the list's benefit, Randall sent me $2 via PayPal, suggesting I > buy > >> a candy bar. > > Thanks Randall, I may unofficially call this the Randall release. > Kinda > >> got a ring to it, that. > > If anyone else wants to sponsor the release, you know what to do. > > On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:25, Noah Slater wrote: > > > Send $1 to nsla...@tumbolia.org and I will cut it. > > > > On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:13, Randall Leeds wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> Cut it! > >> > >> On Feb 25, 2010 12:08 PM, "Paul Davis" > > >> wrote: > >> > >>> So really all of the patches brought up in the last few hours are > >> good > >> candidates for 1.0. > >> +1 > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Filipe David Manana, > > fdman...@gmail.com > > PGP key - http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC569452B > > > > "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. > > Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. > > That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men." > > -- Filipe David Manana, fdman...@gmail.com PGP key - http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC569452B "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On Feb 26, 2010, at 7:00 AM, Filipe David Manana wrote: > I would still like to see ticket 639 in 0.11. > I'm reading 639 and it seems like a great patch. But it's a little bit big and I can't tell for certain that there isn't something subtle I'm not seeing. I think the best course of action would be to apply it just after the 0.11 release, so it gets some field testing before it goes out in a release. It's not a new feature so it is still a candidate for 0.11.1 / 1.0. I'd just feel better about introducing a large patch to the code base if it has time to get used in a few different settings before being baked into a release. Chris > Adam told me, via IRC, he will review the patch by the end of this week. > > I vote +1 on it. > > cheers > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Noah Slater wrote: > >> Nope, you can send payment to any email. >> >> As long as the recipient can click on the link in the email, they can >> deposit it into any account. >> >> On 26 Feb 2010, at 14:37, till wrote: >> >>> I always knew secretly open source worked like that. ;) >>> >>> Btw, I know it's not so subtle, but you need to include your paypal >> email... :D >>> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ui86peQZ74s >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Noah Slater >> wrote: For the list's benefit, Randall sent me $2 via PayPal, suggesting I buy >> a candy bar. Thanks Randall, I may unofficially call this the Randall release. Kinda >> got a ring to it, that. If anyone else wants to sponsor the release, you know what to do. On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:25, Noah Slater wrote: > Send $1 to nsla...@tumbolia.org and I will cut it. > > On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:13, Randall Leeds wrote: > >> +1 >> Cut it! >> >> On Feb 25, 2010 12:08 PM, "Paul Davis" >> wrote: >> >>> So really all of the patches brought up in the last few hours are >> good >> candidates for 1.0. >> +1 > >> >> > > > -- > Filipe David Manana, > fdman...@gmail.com > PGP key - http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC569452B > > "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. > Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. > That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
I would still like to see ticket 639 in 0.11. Adam told me, via IRC, he will review the patch by the end of this week. I vote +1 on it. cheers On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Noah Slater wrote: > Nope, you can send payment to any email. > > As long as the recipient can click on the link in the email, they can > deposit it into any account. > > On 26 Feb 2010, at 14:37, till wrote: > > > I always knew secretly open source worked like that. ;) > > > > Btw, I know it's not so subtle, but you need to include your paypal > email... :D > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ui86peQZ74s > > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Noah Slater > wrote: > >> For the list's benefit, Randall sent me $2 via PayPal, suggesting I buy > a candy bar. > >> > >> Thanks Randall, I may unofficially call this the Randall release. Kinda > got a ring to it, that. > >> > >> If anyone else wants to sponsor the release, you know what to do. > >> > >> On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:25, Noah Slater wrote: > >> > >>> Send $1 to nsla...@tumbolia.org and I will cut it. > >>> > >>> On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:13, Randall Leeds wrote: > >>> > +1 > Cut it! > > On Feb 25, 2010 12:08 PM, "Paul Davis" > wrote: > > > So really all of the patches brought up in the last few hours are > good > candidates for 1.0. > +1 > >>> > >> > >> > > -- Filipe David Manana, fdman...@gmail.com PGP key - http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC569452B "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
Nope, you can send payment to any email. As long as the recipient can click on the link in the email, they can deposit it into any account. On 26 Feb 2010, at 14:37, till wrote: > I always knew secretly open source worked like that. ;) > > Btw, I know it's not so subtle, but you need to include your paypal email... > :D > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ui86peQZ74s > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Noah Slater wrote: >> For the list's benefit, Randall sent me $2 via PayPal, suggesting I buy a >> candy bar. >> >> Thanks Randall, I may unofficially call this the Randall release. Kinda got >> a ring to it, that. >> >> If anyone else wants to sponsor the release, you know what to do. >> >> On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:25, Noah Slater wrote: >> >>> Send $1 to nsla...@tumbolia.org and I will cut it. >>> >>> On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:13, Randall Leeds wrote: >>> +1 Cut it! On Feb 25, 2010 12:08 PM, "Paul Davis" wrote: > So really all of the patches brought up in the last few hours are good candidates for 1.0. +1 >>> >> >>
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
I always knew secretly open source worked like that. ;) Btw, I know it's not so subtle, but you need to include your paypal email... :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ui86peQZ74s On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Noah Slater wrote: > For the list's benefit, Randall sent me $2 via PayPal, suggesting I buy a > candy bar. > > Thanks Randall, I may unofficially call this the Randall release. Kinda got a > ring to it, that. > > If anyone else wants to sponsor the release, you know what to do. > > On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:25, Noah Slater wrote: > >> Send $1 to nsla...@tumbolia.org and I will cut it. >> >> On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:13, Randall Leeds wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> Cut it! >>> >>> On Feb 25, 2010 12:08 PM, "Paul Davis" wrote: >>> So really all of the patches brought up in the last few hours are good >>> candidates for 1.0. >>> +1 >> > >
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
For the list's benefit, Randall sent me $2 via PayPal, suggesting I buy a candy bar. Thanks Randall, I may unofficially call this the Randall release. Kinda got a ring to it, that. If anyone else wants to sponsor the release, you know what to do. On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:25, Noah Slater wrote: > Send $1 to nsla...@tumbolia.org and I will cut it. > > On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:13, Randall Leeds wrote: > >> +1 >> Cut it! >> >> On Feb 25, 2010 12:08 PM, "Paul Davis" wrote: >> >>> So really all of the patches brought up in the last few hours are good >> candidates for 1.0. >> +1 >
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
Send $1 to nsla...@tumbolia.org and I will cut it. On 25 Feb 2010, at 20:13, Randall Leeds wrote: > +1 > Cut it! > > On Feb 25, 2010 12:08 PM, "Paul Davis" wrote: > >> So really all of the patches brought up in the last few hours are good > candidates for 1.0. > +1
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
+1 Cut it! On Feb 25, 2010 12:08 PM, "Paul Davis" wrote: > So really all of the patches brought up in the last few hours are good candidates for 1.0. +1
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
> So really all of the patches brought up in the last few hours are good > candidates for 1.0. +1
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On Feb 25, 2010, at 9:15 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > > On 25 Feb 2010, at 04:43, Robert Newson wrote: > >> I second this emotion. :) >> >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 5:06 AM, Randall Leeds >> wrote: >>> See my last comment on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-597 >>> >>> I would <3 <3 <3 to see this make it. > > > There's a ton of patches I'd like to see in CouchDB, but we'll never release > anything > if don't make a cut somewhere. 0.11 has been in the making for 9 months now > and > really needs to get out there so we can find and fix all the bugs that users > find so > 1.0 becomes a grand release. > > If you are concerned that "yourfavouritepatch" doesn't make it into 1.0: > After 0.11 > is released we'll only fix bugs in that branch and eventually cut 1.0 from > it. If you > think a new feature should be in 1.0 that is not in 0.11, call for a vote for > that > patch. Be prepared that it should be simple enough and should have tests and > not break anything. If "yourfavouritepatch" is a bugfix, there's no need for > a vote > for a commit. > Agreed. I'd further say that I consider the replicator to be the one place I'm happy to see enhancements introduced between 0.11 and 1.0. The replicator is decoupled from the rest of CouchDB, so changes here aren't likely to introduce instabilities. I'd also be fine to see enhancements to Futon made between 0.11 and 1.0. Again, nothing here is likely to negatively impact active CouchDB users, or otherwise cause instabilities. So really all of the patches brought up in the last few hours are good candidates for 1.0. Chris > Cheers > Jan > -- > > >
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
I second this emotion. :) On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 5:06 AM, Randall Leeds wrote: > See my last comment on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-597 > > I would <3 <3 <3 to see this make it. >
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
If not asking too much, I would also like to see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-639in 0.11. It's a follow up to the attachment compression feature and also fixes the problem with push replication when docs have large attachments (ticket 163 related also). cheers On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Noah Slater wrote: > And I just this morning noticed a request from Matt Goodall about 0.11 > Futon storage. > > On 25 Feb 2010, at 10:06, Randall Leeds wrote: > > > See my last comment on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-597 > > > > I would <3 <3 <3 to see this make it. > > -- Filipe David Manana, fdman...@gmail.com PGP key - http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC569452B "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On 25 February 2010 11:35, Noah Slater wrote: > > And I just this morning noticed a request from Matt Goodall about 0.11 Futon > storage. The Futon Storage issue, COUCHDB-668, is fixed in master/trunk. The one I'm really concerned about now is COUCHDB-671 [1], "Futon changes data when starting to edit", and, to a lesser degree, COUCHDB-667 [2], "Futon implicit typing when adding/editing fields is flawed", although the two issues are quite closely related. - Matt [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-671 [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-667
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
And I just this morning noticed a request from Matt Goodall about 0.11 Futon storage. On 25 Feb 2010, at 10:06, Randall Leeds wrote: > See my last comment on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-597 > > I would <3 <3 <3 to see this make it.
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
See my last comment on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-597 I would <3 <3 <3 to see this make it.
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On Feb 22, 2010, at 7:31 AM, Noah Slater wrote: > > On 22 Feb 2010, at 03:38, J Chris Anderson wrote: > >> I've checked and added json2.js to the NEWS and CHANGES in trunk and 0.11 >> >> Also it's nice to think about breaking changes as well when you are thinking >> of this. I've got a bunch of stuff written up and headed wikiward for 0.11, >> but for future reference, we should think of the breaking changes page as >> being in the same boat as news and changes. > > Agreed. > > I have added this as a new checkpoint for the release procedure. I'm ready for 0.11 to happen. It's been long enough for comments, etc. I know we've been finding and fixing bugs, but hopefully we've done the majority of that. The point of the feature freeze is to let us focus on finding and fixing bugs for 1.0, so we shouldn't let the possibility of a few stragglers hold us back. So let's do this thing! Chris
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On 22 Feb 2010, at 03:38, J Chris Anderson wrote: > I've checked and added json2.js to the NEWS and CHANGES in trunk and 0.11 > > Also it's nice to think about breaking changes as well when you are thinking > of this. I've got a bunch of stuff written up and headed wikiward for 0.11, > but for future reference, we should think of the breaking changes page as > being in the same boat as news and changes. Agreed. I have added this as a new checkpoint for the release procedure. Thanks Chris.
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On Feb 21, 2010, at 7:01 PM, Jason Davies wrote: > Hey Noah, > > On 20 Feb 2010, at 18:38, Noah Slater wrote: > >> Can the other committers please acknowledge that they have checked these >> files for changesets they are responsible for? > > > I've checked and have nothing to add. I've checked and added json2.js to the NEWS and CHANGES in trunk and 0.11 Also it's nice to think about breaking changes as well when you are thinking of this. I've got a bunch of stuff written up and headed wikiward for 0.11, but for future reference, we should think of the breaking changes page as being in the same boat as news and changes. Chris
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
Hey Noah, On 20 Feb 2010, at 18:38, Noah Slater wrote: > Can the other committers please acknowledge that they have checked these > files for changesets they are responsible for? I've checked and have nothing to add. Cheers, -- Jason Davies www.jasondavies.com
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On 21/02/2010 5:38 AM, Noah Slater wrote: Can the other committers please acknowledge that they have checked these files for changesets they are responsible for? I've nothing to add. Cheers, Mark
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On Saturday, February 20, 2010, Noah Slater wrote: > Can the other committers please acknowledge that they have checked these > files for changesets they are responsible for? > > Fixing these files is a significant source of friction for me when preparing > the release, as any error spotted means a complete rebuild and test of the > whole package. > > Thanks, ok for myself. benoit
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On 20 Feb 2010, at 10:38, Noah Slater wrote: > Can the other committers please acknowledge that they have checked these > files for changesets they are responsible for? Ack. Cheers Jan -- > > Fixing these files is a significant source of friction for me when preparing > the release, as any error spotted means a complete rebuild and test of the > whole package. > > Thanks, > > On 19 Feb 2010, at 15:18, J Chris Anderson wrote: > >> >> On Feb 19, 2010, at 5:33 AM, Filipe David Manana wrote: >> >>> hi guys, >>> >>> Both NEWS and CHANGES seem to be missing the replication by doc ids (ticket >>> COUCHDB-631). >>> Shouldn't it be mentioned there? >>> >> >> Thanks for pointing that out. I've updated the files and backported. >> >>> cheers >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: >>> On 18 Feb 2010, at 13:34, Benoit Chesneau wrote: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Noah Slater wrote: >> Hey, >> >> I have been asked to release CouchDB 0.11. >> >> In accordance with our documented release procedure, I am making a formal request for comments. The most important part of this process is that each developer checks the README, NEWS, and CHANGES files, updating them as necessary. >> >> If you have any other comments, or objections, please also raise them now. >> >> Thanks, >> >> N > > Commited my changes too and updated the site to add me to the > committers. How is the site updated ? Anything to do or is it > automatic ? > ssh people.apache.org "svn up /www/couchdb.apache.org" ... U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/lists.html U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/committers.txt U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/committers.html Updated to revision 911650. And then it takes about an hour to get updated and synched to all the mirrors. Cheers Jan -- >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Filipe David Manana, >>> fdman...@gmail.com >>> PGP key - http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC569452B >>> >>> "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. >>> Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. >>> That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men." >> >
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
Can the other committers please acknowledge that they have checked these files for changesets they are responsible for? Fixing these files is a significant source of friction for me when preparing the release, as any error spotted means a complete rebuild and test of the whole package. Thanks, On 19 Feb 2010, at 15:18, J Chris Anderson wrote: > > On Feb 19, 2010, at 5:33 AM, Filipe David Manana wrote: > >> hi guys, >> >> Both NEWS and CHANGES seem to be missing the replication by doc ids (ticket >> COUCHDB-631). >> Shouldn't it be mentioned there? >> > > Thanks for pointing that out. I've updated the files and backported. > >> cheers >> >> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: >> >>> >>> On 18 Feb 2010, at 13:34, Benoit Chesneau wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Noah Slater wrote: > Hey, > > I have been asked to release CouchDB 0.11. > > In accordance with our documented release procedure, I am making a >>> formal request for comments. The most important part of this process is that >>> each developer checks the README, NEWS, and CHANGES files, updating them as >>> necessary. > > If you have any other comments, or objections, please also raise them >>> now. > > Thanks, > > N Commited my changes too and updated the site to add me to the committers. How is the site updated ? Anything to do or is it automatic ? >>> ssh people.apache.org "svn up /www/couchdb.apache.org" >>> ... >>> U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/lists.html >>> U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/committers.txt >>> U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/committers.html >>> Updated to revision 911650. >>> >>> And then it takes about an hour to get updated and synched to all the >>> mirrors. >>> >>> Cheers >>> Jan >>> -- >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Filipe David Manana, >> fdman...@gmail.com >> PGP key - http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC569452B >> >> "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. >> Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. >> That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men." >
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On Feb 19, 2010, at 5:33 AM, Filipe David Manana wrote: > hi guys, > > Both NEWS and CHANGES seem to be missing the replication by doc ids (ticket > COUCHDB-631). > Shouldn't it be mentioned there? > Thanks for pointing that out. I've updated the files and backported. > cheers > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > >> >> On 18 Feb 2010, at 13:34, Benoit Chesneau wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Noah Slater wrote: Hey, I have been asked to release CouchDB 0.11. In accordance with our documented release procedure, I am making a >> formal request for comments. The most important part of this process is that >> each developer checks the README, NEWS, and CHANGES files, updating them as >> necessary. If you have any other comments, or objections, please also raise them >> now. Thanks, N >>> >>> Commited my changes too and updated the site to add me to the >>> committers. How is the site updated ? Anything to do or is it >>> automatic ? >> >>> ssh people.apache.org "svn up /www/couchdb.apache.org" >> ... >> U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/lists.html >> U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/committers.txt >> U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/committers.html >> Updated to revision 911650. >> >> And then it takes about an hour to get updated and synched to all the >> mirrors. >> >> Cheers >> Jan >> -- >> >> > > > -- > Filipe David Manana, > fdman...@gmail.com > PGP key - http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC569452B > > "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. > Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. > That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
hi guys, Both NEWS and CHANGES seem to be missing the replication by doc ids (ticket COUCHDB-631). Shouldn't it be mentioned there? cheers On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > > On 18 Feb 2010, at 13:34, Benoit Chesneau wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Noah Slater wrote: > >> Hey, > >> > >> I have been asked to release CouchDB 0.11. > >> > >> In accordance with our documented release procedure, I am making a > formal request for comments. The most important part of this process is that > each developer checks the README, NEWS, and CHANGES files, updating them as > necessary. > >> > >> If you have any other comments, or objections, please also raise them > now. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> N > > > > Commited my changes too and updated the site to add me to the > > committers. How is the site updated ? Anything to do or is it > > automatic ? > > > ssh people.apache.org "svn up /www/couchdb.apache.org" > ... > U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/lists.html > U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/committers.txt > U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/committers.html > Updated to revision 911650. > > And then it takes about an hour to get updated and synched to all the > mirrors. > > Cheers > Jan > -- > > -- Filipe David Manana, fdman...@gmail.com PGP key - http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC569452B "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On 18 Feb 2010, at 13:34, Benoit Chesneau wrote: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Noah Slater wrote: >> Hey, >> >> I have been asked to release CouchDB 0.11. >> >> In accordance with our documented release procedure, I am making a formal >> request for comments. The most important part of this process is that each >> developer checks the README, NEWS, and CHANGES files, updating them as >> necessary. >> >> If you have any other comments, or objections, please also raise them now. >> >> Thanks, >> >> N > > Commited my changes too and updated the site to add me to the > committers. How is the site updated ? Anything to do or is it > automatic ? > ssh people.apache.org "svn up /www/couchdb.apache.org" ... U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/lists.html U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/committers.txt U/www/couchdb.apache.org/community/committers.html Updated to revision 911650. And then it takes about an hour to get updated and synched to all the mirrors. Cheers Jan --
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Noah Slater wrote: > Hey, > > I have been asked to release CouchDB 0.11. > > In accordance with our documented release procedure, I am making a formal > request for comments. The most important part of this process is that each > developer checks the README, NEWS, and CHANGES files, updating them as > necessary. > > If you have any other comments, or objections, please also raise them now. > > Thanks, > > N Commited my changes too and updated the site to add me to the committers. How is the site updated ? Anything to do or is it automatic ? - benoît
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
Awesome, Coolness. My updates are in. Paul On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Noah Slater wrote: > CHANGES are for developers, NEWS is for users. The rest is your call. > > On 16 Feb 2010, at 20:05, Paul Davis wrote: > >> Awesome, >> >> Yay release party! Is there a rule of thumb for what goes in CHANGES >> and what goes in NEWS? I'm going over the bullet points and trying to >> figure out where to put a couple different things that are missing. >> >> Paul >> >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Noah Slater wrote: >>> Hey, >>> >>> I have been asked to release CouchDB 0.11. >>> >>> In accordance with our documented release procedure, I am making a formal >>> request for comments. The most important part of this process is that each >>> developer checks the README, NEWS, and CHANGES files, updating them as >>> necessary. >>> >>> If you have any other comments, or objections, please also raise them now. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> N > >
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
CHANGES are for developers, NEWS is for users. The rest is your call. On 16 Feb 2010, at 20:05, Paul Davis wrote: > Awesome, > > Yay release party! Is there a rule of thumb for what goes in CHANGES > and what goes in NEWS? I'm going over the bullet points and trying to > figure out where to put a couple different things that are missing. > > Paul > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Noah Slater wrote: >> Hey, >> >> I have been asked to release CouchDB 0.11. >> >> In accordance with our documented release procedure, I am making a formal >> request for comments. The most important part of this process is that each >> developer checks the README, NEWS, and CHANGES files, updating them as >> necessary. >> >> If you have any other comments, or objections, please also raise them now. >> >> Thanks, >> >> N
Re: Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
Awesome, Yay release party! Is there a rule of thumb for what goes in CHANGES and what goes in NEWS? I'm going over the bullet points and trying to figure out where to put a couple different things that are missing. Paul On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Noah Slater wrote: > Hey, > > I have been asked to release CouchDB 0.11. > > In accordance with our documented release procedure, I am making a formal > request for comments. The most important part of this process is that each > developer checks the README, NEWS, and CHANGES files, updating them as > necessary. > > If you have any other comments, or objections, please also raise them now. > > Thanks, > > N
Releasing 0.11, Request for Comments
Hey, I have been asked to release CouchDB 0.11. In accordance with our documented release procedure, I am making a formal request for comments. The most important part of this process is that each developer checks the README, NEWS, and CHANGES files, updating them as necessary. If you have any other comments, or objections, please also raise them now. Thanks, N