Re: (Un)Stable release team

[Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org>]

Hi,

Here is a draft of the release process for development versions (http://pad.ceph.com/p/development-releases-draft) which I experimented with manually. Comment and suggestions are welcome.

Cheers

On 26/02/2016 14:41, Loic Dachary wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> It's a quiet time in the small world of the stable release team, ideal for mentoring the new members who generously answered our call for participation. Welcome to Chen Xiaoxi, Gaurav Bafna, Wei-Chung Cheng, Martin Palma and Chris Jones :-)
> 
> I propose that we take advantage of the next few weeks to expand our scope in two ways: 
> 
> * test Ceph development versions as well as stable versions
> * publish packages for Ceph development versions
> 
> Testing Ceph development versions is actually less work than with stable versions because the developers run a lot of tests already and fix problems on a daily basis. Our help would likely be needed with a few teuthology suite runs right before the development release is published, once a month. But the development versions tend to be more frequent, therefore it will probably be as much work as for a stable release, overall. The workflow would be revisited: there is no cherry-picking. Instead, bug fixes must be against the jewel branch or whatever branch will be the upcoming stable. And this branch is merged back into master on a regular basis (i.e. more frequently than the development releases).
> 
> As you may have noticed, no packages were published for the 10.0.3 development release and that's where we could make a real difference. This would be an entirely new part of our workflow, but also an exciting one because it's the last missing piece of the puzzle. Once we are able to publish usable packages for development releases, nothing is stopping us to do the same for stable releases. It's a lot easier than it seems since the packages are already built for the teuthology jobs. All we need is a public space to archive them and sign them. This is not mutually exclusive with the current package publication workflow, it would be a community driven alternative that is much needed in some cases.
> 
> Of course, this is easier said than done :-) What do you think ? Are there other important work that we should try to accomplish instead ? Things that would benefit Ceph users and developers more ?
> 
> Cheers
> 

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html