Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Justin Erenkrantz wrote: On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 12:00:10AM +0100, Maxime Petazzoni wrote: According to what Bill said, I'm now waiting for votes on making it Alpha, Beta or GA. Thank you, and sorry for the mess. We should add a paragraph to the Release Guidelines about the release candidate stage, this point is not clear right out of the documentation. Um, no. We don't have release candidates. You followed the documented procedures correctly - you aren't the confused one. =) -- justin Ok now I'M confused. You call something a release before it's voted on? Justin, stop and explain, pick apart my misstatements for history and for education of all of us. Don't simply shoot the messenger. Is this just a matter of calling this a 'tarball' instead of a 'release candidate'??? Sounds like nitpicking, but until it's voted on, this cannot be a Release to be voted on right? Bill
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Justin Erenkrantz wrote: Um, no. We don't have release candidates. You followed the documented procedures correctly - you aren't the confused one. =) -- justin Sorry, Justin. I just reviewed the Guidelines, and they are, simply, wrong. Email dev@httpd.apache.org, current-testers@httpd.apache.org and stable-testers@httpd.apache.org to inform them of the release. Uhm, this is not proper, there is no -release-. You might email dev@, and (now) testers@ to inform them of a candidate, but not of a release, as there is NO release without a vote. At this point, the release is an alpha. The Apache HTTP Server Project has three classifications for its releases: * Alpha * Beta * General Availability (GA) Alpha indicates that the release is not meant for mainstream usage or may have serious problems that prohibits its use. When a release is initially created, it automatically becomes alpha quality. Wrong on a single count. There is NO alpha until there is a vote. This was the policy THROUGHOUT the tags of 2.0.n - we voted that a tarball was alpha, then voted it beta. At 2.0.36 or so we voted it GA, but again, every Release was voted on. You know full well the ASF calls NOTHING a release that does not have its endorsement, and the only way to obtain that endorsement is 3 +1's. Until it has 3 +1's, it's nothing but a snapshot, pure and simple.
Release guidelines [Was: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha]
Hi, I think it's clear that we have here a little problem with the release guidelines. According to Justin, I followed them correctly in the first place. It seems that what we are used to and what we've done this far (making a release candidate tarball, then vote for it to become a release as Alpha, Beta or GA) is not what the Release Guidelines tell us to do. If we all agree on this, I think we should correct the Release Guidelines to add this Release Candidate concept. This modification should take place in the How to do a release ? section, by adding a paragraph about making a release candidate tarball and call for a vote. The attached patch is a scratch we could use as a starting point. Regards, - Sam -- Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org) -- gone crazy, back soon. leave message. Index: xdocs/dev/release.xml === --- xdocs/dev/release.xml (revision 357987) +++ xdocs/dev/release.xml (working copy) @@ -107,23 +107,29 @@ sectiontitleHow to do a release?/title pOnce the tree has been suitably tested by the RM and any other -interested parties, they should roll the release./p +interested parties, they should start the release process./p +pThe first step consists in creating a Release Candidate +tarball. It's important to understand that this tarball strongis +not/strong a release yet. It's only a candidate./p + pKey points:/p ul liEnsure that the RM's PGP/GPG key is in the httpd-dist/KEYS file/li liCreate an official APACHE_X_Y_Z tag based on the candidate tree/li liRun the httpd-dist/tools/release.sh script/li -liCopy the generated release tarballs and signatures to +liCopy the generated tarballs and signatures to minotaur:/www/httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/li liEmail dev@httpd.apache.org, current-testers@httpd.apache.org and [EMAIL PROTECTED] to inform them of the release./li [EMAIL PROTECTED] to inform them of the availability of +the release candidate./li /ul /section -sectiontitleWhat can I call this release?/title -pAt this point, the release is an alpha. The Apache HTTP Server Project -has three classifications for its releases:/p +sectiontitleWhen can I call this a release?/title +pAt this point, a vote is started to make the candidate become a +release. The Apache HTTP Server Project has three classifications for +its releases:/p ul liAlpha/li signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
* Sander Temme [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-12-21 08:29:00]: OK, Ajax is now running this drop. I will keep watch for cores although if other folks could keep an eye out that would be great as I'm kinda swamped. Great. I was going to ask the infra team to turn on the MboxAntispam and MboxHideEmpty directives, but it seems you made it while upgrading to 0.2rc1. Thanks ! - Sam -- Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org) -- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
On Dec 21, 2005, at 2:43 PM, Maxime Petazzoni wrote: * Sander Temme [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-12-21 08:29:00]: OK, Ajax is now running this drop. I will keep watch for cores although if other folks could keep an eye out that would be great as I'm kinda swamped. Great. I was going to ask the infra team to turn on the MboxAntispam and MboxHideEmpty directives, but it seems you made it while upgrading to 0.2rc1. I did no such thing. I could turn them on, but if the current state of the module makes you think they are already on, is that desirable? S. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.temme.net/sander/ PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4 B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
* Sander Temme [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-12-21 14:57:01]: I did no such thing. I could turn them on, but if the current state of the module makes you think they are already on, is that desirable? My bad. They're just now On by default in mod_mbox :) - Sam -- Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org) -- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
You guys are confusing each other to bits. We don't have release candidates, we NEVER use m.n.v.rc1 versioning, and the thing that Sam produced is called a tarball. We call it that because we don't want people to believe it is a release until the PMC has voted to release it. That's all there is to it. Sam, you just need to follow the same process as all of our other releases -- send a message to dev asking for votes on the tarball for declaring it the 0.2.0 alpha release. Give it three days and, at the end, if you have at least three +1s (including your own) and a majority of positive votes for release, then you can move it to the actual release dist and work on an announcement to go out 24hrs later. Roy
mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Hi, The mailing list archives browser mod_mbox [1] has been tagged and released as v0.2 (Alpha) a few hours ago. If you have some spare time and would like to try this new version, you can find temporary tarballs and the ChangeLog in my people.apache.org web space [2]. You can also checkout the Subversion tag used to create the tarballs with the following command : svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_mbox/tags/0.2 mod_mbox-0.2 Documentation on how to setup mod_mbox is available at the mod_mbox website [3]. As far as I can tell, the version running on http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ is not up-to-date. Some parsing bugs have been fixed and thus the browsing experience may not be the same as for this release. Any feedback and vote for pursuing the release process is welcome. Thank you for your interest in mod_mbox, - Sam [1] http://httpd.apache.org/mod_mbox/ [2] http://people.apache.org/~maxime/mod_mbox/ [3] http://httpd.apache.org/mod_mbox/install.html PS: if you need some mailing archives to make mod_mbox run on, you can use the following command to download [EMAIL PROTECTED] archives : rsync -avr svn.apache.org::public-arch/httpd.apache.org/dev/ dev/ -- Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org) -- gone crazy, back soon. leave message. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Maxime Petazzoni wrote: The mailing list archives browser mod_mbox [1] has been tagged and released as v0.2 (Alpha) a few hours ago. Maxime, if you just created a new tarball, this isn't an alpha or 'released' just yet... you need votes on the release candidate tarball. Please be careful of the word 'released', it applies only to a tarball which has recieved 3 +1's and more ayes than nays. We usually call the 'before' file a release candidate, or simply tagged and rolled. In these httpd projects, we prefer to land candidates in the dev playground, /www/httpd.apache.org/dev/dist on people.apache.org, (which then maps to http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/) and if you don't have permission (I -think- you should) we can ensure that you at least gain access to a mod_mbox/ subdirectory under that tree. Bill
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Hi, * William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-12-20 16:05:50]: Maxime Petazzoni wrote: The mailing list archives browser mod_mbox [1] has been tagged and released as v0.2 (Alpha) a few hours ago. if you just created a new tarball, this isn't an alpha or 'released' just yet... you need votes on the release candidate tarball. Please be careful of the word 'released', it applies only to a tarball which has recieved 3 +1's and more ayes than nays. We usually call the 'before' file a release candidate, or simply tagged and rolled. Yes, I should not have used to word 'released' itself, but I specified as v0.2 *Alpha* which should be enough to indicate that it's only for the first stage of the release process (as defined in the Apache HTTP Server Release Guideline). So how should I call it ? If it's not yet Alpha, how do you publish the initial tarball that would eventually get the 3 +1 votes so it can become Alpha ? In these httpd projects, we prefer to land candidates in the dev playground, /www/httpd.apache.org/dev/dist on people.apache.org, (which then maps to http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/) and if you don't have permission (I -think- you should) we can ensure that you at least gain access to a mod_mbox/ subdirectory under that tree. I was going to do that when I was told on #httpd-dev that it was easier to drop it in my people.apache.org web space : 16:45:08 colmmacc | well, that gets mirrored, I'd use people.apache.org/~whatever/ 16:45:17 colmmacc | that's what the cool kids have used lately ;-) Anyway, if it is needed, I can create a mod_mbox subdir in /dev/dist and put the tarballs in there. I was not really confident into touching minotaur's DocumentRoot directory structure, that's why I used this easier and safer solution. - Sam -- Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org) -- gone crazy, back soon. leave message. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Maxime Petazzoni wrote: Maxime Petazzoni wrote: The mailing list archives browser mod_mbox [1] has been tagged and released as v0.2 (Alpha) a few hours ago. Please be careful of the word 'released', it applies only to a tarball which has recieved 3 +1's and more ayes than nays. We usually call the 'before' file a release candidate, or simply tagged and rolled. Yes, I should not have used to word 'released' itself, but I specified as v0.2 *Alpha* which should be enough to indicate that it's only for the first stage of the release process Actually ;-p ... we do have true Alpha Releases, releases approved by the project, yet not really slated for general availablility. So how should I call it ? If it's not yet Alpha, how do you publish the initial tarball that would eventually get the 3 +1 votes so it can become Alpha ? Some projects have a voting system where they ask for 'your choice to release', and users vote +1 alpha, beta, GA. If GA gets enough votes, that's it - a full release. If GA fails but beta (counting the GA folks) gets enough, it's beta, and if GA/beta fails, yet counting all the +1's there are enough for an alpha, it's an official alpha release (with a 0.2-alpha.tar.gz sort of filename in the main/mirrored distribution locations.) Simply call it a release candidate for now, that would work. I was going to do that when I was told on #httpd-dev that it was easier to drop it in my people.apache.org web space : 16:45:08 colmmacc | well, that gets mirrored, I'd use people.apache.org/~whatever/ 16:45:17 colmmacc | that's what the cool kids have used lately ;-) httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ is mirrored? Even if it is, just don't worry about that. Our convention is that anything in dev/dist/ is nothing but a candidate, not a proper release. Anyway, if it is needed, I can create a mod_mbox subdir in /dev/dist and put the tarballs in there. I was not really confident into touching minotaur's DocumentRoot directory structure, that's why I used this easier and safer solution. Don't panic :) And yes, the subdir makes it easier for users to find, IMHO. I've done the same for mod_aspdotnet snapshots. Bill
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
Hi, * William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-12-20 16:45:33]: Simply call it a release candidate for now, that would work. Anyway, if it is needed, I can create a mod_mbox subdir in /dev/dist and put the tarballs in there. I was not really confident into touching minotaur's DocumentRoot directory structure, that's why I used this easier and safer solution. Don't panic :) And yes, the subdir makes it easier for users to find, IMHO. I've done the same for mod_aspdotnet snapshots. Ok, then let's start again. A mod_mbox release candidate, mod_mbox-0.2rc1, is available at http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_mbox/ According to what Bill said, I'm now waiting for votes on making it Alpha, Beta or GA. Thank you, and sorry for the mess. We should add a paragraph to the Release Guidelines about the release candidate stage, this point is not clear right out of the documentation. - Sam -- Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org) -- gone crazy, back soon. leave message. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
On 20.12.2005, at 23:45, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Maxime Petazzoni wrote: I was going to do that when I was told on #httpd-dev that it was easier to drop it in my people.apache.org web space : 16:45:08 colmmacc | well, that gets mirrored, I'd use people.apache.org/~whatever/ 16:45:17 colmmacc | that's what the cool kids have used lately ;-) httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ is mirrored? Even if it is, just don't worry about that. Our convention is that anything in dev/dist/ is nothing but a candidate, not a proper release. Just for the record: no, httpd.apache.org/dev/dist (minotaur:/www/ www.apache.org/dev/dist) is not mirrored - only www.apache.org/dist (minotaur:/www/www.apache.org/dist) is mirrored. Cheers, Erik smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: mod_mbox 0.2 goes alpha
On Dec 21, 2005, at 12:00 AM, Maxime Petazzoni wrote: Ok, then let's start again. A mod_mbox release candidate, mod_mbox-0.2rc1, is available at http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_mbox/ OK, Ajax is now running this drop. I will keep watch for cores although if other folks could keep an eye out that would be great as I'm kinda swamped. Drop checksums and signatures check out. S. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.temme.net/sander/ PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4 B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
