On 08/12/2016 12:22 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > I thought that the basic requirement is that the release manager(s) do any > builds on a machine under their [exclusive] individual control. That also > means satisfying baseline requirements for release builds though. That > pretty much requires use of a VM if the main development system of a release > manager is aligned with different tools and dependencies.
I don't find any requirement like this vis a vis building by the release manager per se. The release is voted on by the community. So, in a sense, building/testing is the responsibility of all who vote on a release. See: www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html > > I am not so certain about putting up shared release-build VMs on non-ASF > infrastructure though. Our "official", "required" release artifact is the source code for a release. > > One advantage to using ASF infrastructure is to bring code signing into the > fold. That seems rather important down the road. We have been signing ALL release artifacts -- including all the binaries -- since AOO 3.4. So code signing of everything we release is already part of this process. We require a production environment accessible by the release manager and helpers because producing distribution binaries in another location (seperate developer machine), signing and then uploading ALL the binaries to SourceForce by individuals is a horrendous undertaking. Ariel Constenla-Haile provided binaries for the 3.4 release and I'm sure he can attest to this. If we can set up a production environment under ASF infrastructure, of course this would be ideal. But, I see no reason why this environment couldn't have shell access by AOO developers who are likely to do code signing. > > - Dennis > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2016 10:29 >> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org >> Subject: Ready to setup release build machines? >> >> Seeing the issue from a purely technical point of view (i.e., imagining >> for a while that there is no cost associated and no Infra around), how >> far are we from having an "Apache OpenOffice build farm" where we can >> build releases? >> >> Note: this is not a buildbot. Buildbots are meant to check that the >> build is not broken. They do create install sets, but for example the >> Linux builds wouldn't be as compatible as the ones we build on CentOS 5. >> What I mean here is VMs able to build a release. >> >> I think that within two-three weekends I could theoretically be able to >> setup a Linux-based VM host and two KVM-based VMs running CentOS 5 (32 >> and 64 bit) that would be able to build releases and that could have >> shared access (i.e., not only me but other active PMC members). But this >> would only cover a small subset of users. >> >> What about Windows? Would someone be able, under the same hypothesis, to >> add a Windows VM to the stack? This would bring us much closer to full >> coverage. >> >> And what about Mac? If I recall correctly, one is tied with Apple >> hardware for MacOS X. What would be a way to bring Mac builds under >> "collective" control? >> >> Regards, >> Andrea. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > -- -------------------------------------------- MzK "Time spent with cats is never wasted." -- Sigmund Freud --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
