Re: [NOTICE] Intent to T&R 2.5.0-alpha

[Daniel Ruggeri]

Hi, Luca;

   This is a good question and I think it's fair to say that we could
use STATUS. There are sections for showstoppers as well as a wish list
section. Obviously, looking at trunk STATUS, there's some stuff in there
that can be cleaned up a bit, but it seems to have all of the sections
needed. Prioritization can be difficult since we are a workforce of
volunteers, but I'm a fan of lists. As I bet is the case for most, I
tend to knock things out at the top of the list before moving down the
list. Perhaps the sections (like WISH LIST) can be sorted by order of
times users report things or we come across it in our own testing?

-- 
Daniel Ruggeri

P.S.
Resending to dev list

 On 11/4/2017 5:46 AM, Luca Toscano wrote:
> I have a question for you about how do we plan to collect/list the
> 'known issues' in trunk, in order to address them properly in the next
> iterations of the 2.5.0 process to become a stable release.
>
> For example, there is this thread that I'd really think is important:
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c56cfc034e0b91261057aec7e7d12309e7561dcb0c038ef06b36081b@%3Cdev.httpd.apache.org%3E
>
> I also believe that other people have pointers to things that would
> need some love in trunk, but of course nobody has the overall complete
> picture (I think). Would a section in STATUS be a starting point? I've
> read it this morning and I found a ton of things to improve and a lot
> of suggestions, that would probably require a big workforce to be
> completed (in parallel to keeping 2.4.x up to date with bug fixes
> etc..). Do we have an idea how to prioritize the work (or simply
> decide the 'must' vs 'nice to have')?

Re: [NOTICE] Intent to T&R 2.5.0-alpha

[William A Rowe Jr]

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 5:41 AM, Daniel Ruggeri  wrote:
> Hi, all;
>
>As has been chatted about in other threads, I hope to T&R 2.5.0-alpha
> in the coming days. I suppose notice is too soon to do so this evening,
> so I'll plan for early next week.
>
>Also, as a side note, part of my motivation to be more involved as RM
> is to help establish a more regular release cadence. I envision a world
> where much of the drudgery of our RM processes are automated and have
> begin putting together some scripts to help with that goal. Nothing
> beats practice, though, to identify *all* the places that have to be
> automated so hopefully after this alpha is out the door we'll be in a
> good spot with some scripts and as minimal-as-possible manual procedures.
>
> --
> Daniel Ruggeri
>

Hi Daniel,

thanks for the offer and all your automation effort!

I'm prepared to review this alpha candidate to share the deeper testing
and inspection chore with our broader community, particularly because
we don't offer snapshots for the general public to review, and our entire
purpose is to provide software to the public at no charge.

Re: [NOTICE] Intent to T&R 2.5.0-alpha

[Jacob Perkins]

Very much so, thank you William and Daniel for your feedback and information! 

—
Jacob Perkins
Product Owner
cPanel Inc.

jacob.perk...@cpanel.net 
Office:  713-529-0800 x 4046
Cell:  713-560-8655

> On Nov 3, 2017, at 7:43 AM, William A Rowe Jr  wrote:
> 
> We do not have 2.2 activity, it is fully baked and done, so we have 2.4 GA 
> releases. We would likely want to take 2.2 tarballs down sometime between 
> year end and mid-next year (12 mos anniversary) to avoid further confusion. 
> Patches for security defects in 2.2 will continue to be accumulated until 
> year end.
> 
> As written up at http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html 
> 
> 
> "With the introduction of Apache 2.1, the Apache httpd project has adopted an 
> odd-even release strategy, where development happens with alpha and beta 
> releases assigned an odd-numbered minor version, and its general availability 
> (stable) release is designed with the subsequent even-numbered minor version. 
> E.g. 2.1.0-alpha through 2.1.6-alpha were followed by 2.1.7-beta through 
> 2.1.9 beta, and cumulated in the 2.2.0 general availability release."
> 
> So you can look at 2.5.x releases as "dev", yes. a GA 2.5.x would either be 
> named 2.6.0 or 3.0.0 at the project committee's discretion. That's a call 
> that happens after the scope of 2.5.x changes are reviewed, or earlier if an 
> absolutely breaking change occurs during the 2.5.x incremental changes.
> 
> Hope that clarifies httpd versioning.
> 
> 
> 
> On Nov 2, 2017 11:40, "Jacob Perkins"  > wrote:
> Howdy,
> 
> Could you clear up some confusion for me? 
> 
> We have
> 2.2 and 2.4.
> 
> Is 2.5 the ‘dev’ branch of 2.6? Or are we going 2.2 => 2.4 => 2.5?
> 
> —
> Jacob Perkins
> Product Owner
> cPanel Inc.
> 
> jacob.perk...@cpanel.net 
> Office:  713-529-0800 x 4046 
> Cell:  713-560-8655 
> 
>> On Nov 2, 2017, at 3:41 AM, Daniel Ruggeri > > wrote:
>> 
>> Hi, all;
>> 
>>As has been chatted about in other threads, I hope to T&R 2.5.0-alpha
>> in the coming days. I suppose notice is too soon to do so this evening,
>> so I'll plan for early next week.
>> 
>>Also, as a side note, part of my motivation to be more involved as RM
>> is to help establish a more regular release cadence. I envision a world
>> where much of the drudgery of our RM processes are automated and have
>> begin putting together some scripts to help with that goal. Nothing
>> beats practice, though, to identify *all* the places that have to be
>> automated so hopefully after this alpha is out the door we'll be in a
>> good spot with some scripts and as minimal-as-possible manual procedures.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Daniel Ruggeri
>> 
> 



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: [NOTICE] Intent to T&R 2.5.0-alpha

[Luca Toscano]

Hi Daniel,

2017-11-02 11:41 GMT+01:00 Daniel Ruggeri :

> Hi, all;
>
>As has been chatted about in other threads, I hope to T&R 2.5.0-alpha
> in the coming days. I suppose notice is too soon to do so this evening,
> so I'll plan for early next week.
>
>Also, as a side note, part of my motivation to be more involved as RM
> is to help establish a more regular release cadence. I envision a world
> where much of the drudgery of our RM processes are automated and have
> begin putting together some scripts to help with that goal. Nothing
> beats practice, though, to identify *all* the places that have to be
> automated so hopefully after this alpha is out the door we'll be in a
> good spot with some scripts and as minimal-as-possible manual procedures.



First of all thanks a lot for stepping up and take care of automating
RMing, it is something that we really need! I also like the idea of getting
to a point in which doing a release will be as simple as running a script
(that everybody in the PMC can do without the fear of doing a worldwide
mess).

I have a question for you about how do we plan to collect/list the 'known
issues' in trunk, in order to address them properly in the next iterations
of the 2.5.0 process to become a stable release.

For example, there is this thread that I'd really think is important:

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c56cfc034e0b91261057aec7e7d12309e7561dcb0c038ef06b36081b@%3Cdev.httpd.apache.org%3E

I also believe that other people have pointers to things that would need
some love in trunk, but of course nobody has the overall complete picture
(I think). Would a section in STATUS be a starting point? I've read it this
morning and I found a ton of things to improve and a lot of suggestions,
that would probably require a big workforce to be completed (in parallel to
keeping 2.4.x up to date with bug fixes etc..). Do we have an idea how to
prioritize the work (or simply decide the 'must' vs 'nice to have')?

Thanks!

Luca

Re: [NOTICE] Intent to T&R 2.5.0-alpha

[William A Rowe Jr]

We do not have 2.2 activity, it is fully baked and done, so we have 2.4 GA
releases. We would likely want to take 2.2 tarballs down sometime between
year end and mid-next year (12 mos anniversary) to avoid further confusion.
Patches for security defects in 2.2 will continue to be accumulated until
year end.

As written up at http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html

"With the introduction of Apache 2.1, the Apache httpd project has adopted
an odd-even release strategy, where development happens with alpha and beta
releases assigned an odd-numbered minor version, and its general
availability (stable) release is designed with the subsequent even-numbered
minor version. E.g. 2.1.0-alpha through 2.1.6-alpha were followed by
2.1.7-beta through 2.1.9 beta, and cumulated in the 2.2.0 general
availability release."

So you can look at 2.5.x releases as "dev", yes. a GA 2.5.x would either be
named 2.6.0 or 3.0.0 at the project committee's discretion. That's a call
that happens after the scope of 2.5.x changes are reviewed, or earlier if
an absolutely breaking change occurs during the 2.5.x incremental changes.

Hope that clarifies httpd versioning.



On Nov 2, 2017 11:40, "Jacob Perkins"  wrote:

> Howdy,
>
> Could you clear up some confusion for me?
>
> We have
> 2.2 and 2.4.
>
> Is 2.5 the ‘dev’ branch of 2.6? Or are we going 2.2 => 2.4 => 2.5?
>
> —
> Jacob Perkins
> Product Owner
> *cPanel Inc.*
>
> jacob.perk...@cpanel.net
> Office:  713-529-0800 x 4046 <(713)%20529-0800>
> Cell:  713-560-8655 <(713)%20560-8655>
>
> On Nov 2, 2017, at 3:41 AM, Daniel Ruggeri  wrote:
>
> Hi, all;
>
>As has been chatted about in other threads, I hope to T&R 2.5.0-alpha
> in the coming days. I suppose notice is too soon to do so this evening,
> so I'll plan for early next week.
>
>Also, as a side note, part of my motivation to be more involved as RM
> is to help establish a more regular release cadence. I envision a world
> where much of the drudgery of our RM processes are automated and have
> begin putting together some scripts to help with that goal. Nothing
> beats practice, though, to identify *all* the places that have to be
> automated so hopefully after this alpha is out the door we'll be in a
> good spot with some scripts and as minimal-as-possible manual procedures.
>
> --
> Daniel Ruggeri
>
>
>

Re: [NOTICE] Intent to T&R 2.5.0-alpha

[Daniel Ruggeri]

Hi, Jacob;
  The odd-numbered releases are the dev/unstable releases (aka: trunk). This 
will make the next release 2.6... potentially, 3.0 if we think there have been 
enough changes. I personally don't think there have been, but that's ultimately 
a decision we'll make as a community.

   When 2.5 is API/ABI solidified, trunk gets branched (svn copy) to 2.6 to 
live on as a stable branch. Then, trunk gets a bump up to 2.7.
-- 
Daniel Ruggeri


 Original Message 
From: Jacob Perkins 
Sent: November 2, 2017 11:39:59 AM CDT
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [NOTICE] Intent to T&R 2.5.0-alpha

Howdy,

Could you clear up some confusion for me? 

We have
2.2 and 2.4.

Is 2.5 the ‘dev’ branch of 2.6? Or are we going 2.2 => 2.4 => 2.5?

—
Jacob Perkins
Product Owner
cPanel Inc.

jacob.perk...@cpanel.net <mailto:jacob.perk...@cpanel.net>
Office:  713-529-0800 x 4046
Cell:  713-560-8655

> On Nov 2, 2017, at 3:41 AM, Daniel Ruggeri  wrote:
> 
> Hi, all;
> 
>As has been chatted about in other threads, I hope to T&R 2.5.0-alpha
> in the coming days. I suppose notice is too soon to do so this evening,
> so I'll plan for early next week.
> 
>Also, as a side note, part of my motivation to be more involved as RM
> is to help establish a more regular release cadence. I envision a world
> where much of the drudgery of our RM processes are automated and have
> begin putting together some scripts to help with that goal. Nothing
> beats practice, though, to identify *all* the places that have to be
> automated so hopefully after this alpha is out the door we'll be in a
> good spot with some scripts and as minimal-as-possible manual procedures.
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Ruggeri
> 

Re: [NOTICE] Intent to T&R 2.5.0-alpha

[Jacob Perkins]

Howdy,

Could you clear up some confusion for me? 

We have
2.2 and 2.4.

Is 2.5 the ‘dev’ branch of 2.6? Or are we going 2.2 => 2.4 => 2.5?

—
Jacob Perkins
Product Owner
cPanel Inc.

jacob.perk...@cpanel.net 
Office:  713-529-0800 x 4046
Cell:  713-560-8655

> On Nov 2, 2017, at 3:41 AM, Daniel Ruggeri  wrote:
> 
> Hi, all;
> 
>As has been chatted about in other threads, I hope to T&R 2.5.0-alpha
> in the coming days. I suppose notice is too soon to do so this evening,
> so I'll plan for early next week.
> 
>Also, as a side note, part of my motivation to be more involved as RM
> is to help establish a more regular release cadence. I envision a world
> where much of the drudgery of our RM processes are automated and have
> begin putting together some scripts to help with that goal. Nothing
> beats practice, though, to identify *all* the places that have to be
> automated so hopefully after this alpha is out the door we'll be in a
> good spot with some scripts and as minimal-as-possible manual procedures.
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Ruggeri
> 



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: [NOTICE] Intent to T&R 2.5.0-alpha

[Eric Covener]

>Also, as a side note, part of my motivation to be more involved as RM
> is to help establish a more regular release cadence. I envision a world
> where much of the drudgery of our RM processes are automated and have
> begin putting together some scripts to help with that goal. Nothing
> beats practice, though, to identify *all* the places that have to be
> automated so hopefully after this alpha is out the door we'll be in a
> good spot with some scripts and as minimal-as-possible manual procedures.


Thanks Daniel!