On 7/24/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I agree we could do things to improve our releases. Most ASF releases end up having several RCs, its a natural part of the process, I'm not sure it indicates any failing somewhere.
IMHO when you use the RC method, having multiple RCs does not indicate a failing. it really indicates that committers are carefully vetting the candidates.
There's already lots of doc about doing releases in the ASF - on the ASF main dev pages and within the Incubator site etc. If there's omissions from those existing guides we should get them updated. Tuscany having a 'formal release guide' makes me nervous it would just be used as a stick to beat people with when some issue is discovered. An issue with is that currently making our releases is quite a manual process, fixing this would be more worthwhile than writing more documentation (IMHO).
IMO there's a balance to be struck. each project develops it's own house style for releases. recording this house style allows more developers to act as release managers. IMHO automation is difficult to perfect. recording the house style helps to manage the automation process. though a worthy investment, it is best to adopt an incremental approach. automate more but do not put off automation or releases to wait for the other. the incubator release guide is the next document on my personal hit list. i'd like to see a menu of ways that releases are done at apache allowing project to pick and choose their house style by combining a number of well documentation alternatives. it'd be great if the tuscany team would consider feeding any release documentation they develop back into the release guide and create a style guide linked to the details. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
