Hi Penghui & Yunze, I ever wrote developer guides for TiDB[1] and Apache Kvrocks (Incubating), including the release guide for the latter[2].
Just for your information, I'm preparing the proposal to bring a developer guide page (series docs). Perhaps start in the next month. Although, it cannot help the current status, and I don't want to discuss details on this topic here. Again, just for your information :) Best, tison. [1] https://pingcap.github.io/tidb-dev-guide/ [2] https://kvrocks.apache.org/community/how-to-release Yunze Xu <y...@streamnative.io.invalid> 于2022年8月12日周五 21:57写道： > Yeah, I agree. It’s better to move the release process to the codebase. > > Regarding the automatic validation program, we can have that for some > common verifications like the GPG verification, which only requires a > simple > command if you have downloaded the binary. > > Thanks, > Yunze > > > > > > 2022年8月12日 18:12，PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org> 写道： > > > > Thanks for raising this question. > > > > Maybe we'd better move the release process doc and validation doc > > to the codebase, not the wiki pages. > > > > - Only committers can update the wiki pages > > - The changes without review > > > > After moving to the pulsar codebase > > > > - Everyone can contribute to the validation doc > > - The release process doc update can get reviewers to review > > > > I think there are multiple issues that need to be resolved for the > release > > process > > > > - Have the Python client(Linux, osx) at the RC stage, I think currently > we > > only have the C++ client for RC, but push to pypi after the RC gets > passed > > - Add validation process for the Python and C++ client > > - Add the Go function and Python function validation process > > - Add a script for building images for RC > > - Add images validation process > > > > And another point is can we have an automatic validation program to > reduce > > the burden on validators? > > I'm not sure if it is acceptable. > > > > Thanks, > > Penghui > > > > On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 4:50 PM Haiting Jiang <jianghait...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >>> the 7th step is "Write release notes", should we execute this > >>> step later? > >> > >> From what I see, the release note can be postponed after the voting > >> process. > >> And it's not part of the voting content and does not affect whether we > >> should cut a new release candidate. > >> > >>> In addition, I found the previous candidate [2] includes the docker > >>> images, which is not included in the template of the 8th step "Run the > >>> vote". It seems to be the 10th step "Publish Docker Images". > >> > >> Confused +1, If we do add docker image as part of release vote, we > should > >> also add validation method in [1] > >> > >> [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-Candidate-Validation > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Haiting > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 9:49 PM Yunze Xu <y...@streamnative.io.invalid> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Recently I'm working on the release of 2.8.4 and it's near the vote of > >>> the 1st candidate but I have some questions. > >>> > >>> From the tutorial [1] we can see, the 8th step is "Run the vote". > >>> However, the 7th step is "Write release notes", should we execute this > >>> step later? I see the 16th step is also "Write release notes" but the > >>> 16th step at the beginning of "Release workflow" section is "Update > >>> the site". > >>> > >>> In addition, I found the previous candidate [2] includes the docker > >>> images, which is not included in the template of the 8th step "Run the > >>> vote". It seems to be the 10th step "Publish Docker Images". > >>> > >>> It seems that the documents are not maintained well, which really > >>> makes me confused. Therefore, before voting for the 1st candidate, I > >>> want to get some clarifications from the mail list. > >>> > >>> [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-process > >>> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/q0g5ko617rb77b1wqpxy94ks5mq48d88 > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Yunze > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >
