Instruction seems to be detailed. Though I will only be able to add
meaningful comment when I attempt these(volunteer for a release
manager) :)

Slightly off topic question: Are we not using Jenkins for the build?

Andrews.

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> On Jul 24, 2017, at 3:09 PM, Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> I have created a wiki page with the WIP instructions for the release
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/wiki/Release-process
>>
>> I also have created an INFRA ticket to create the Nexus project so that we
>> can publish maven artifacts.
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14694
>>
>>
>> Any comments on the questions asked?
>
> In item #3 of the release process two additional checks are needed to help 
> with voting.
>
> (a) The output for the RAT report needs to be examined to make sure that all 
> of the source has the proper headers. That any excluded files are properly 
> explained.
> (b) The two release artifacts need to have hashes generated so that users can 
> be sure that they downloaded the genuine package. I believe that MD5 and 
> SHA256 are now typical ...
>
>>
>> If there are no concerns/objections I could volunteer to be the release
>> manager for this release and then we could start a rotation across the
>> committers for the subsequent releases.
>
> Rotation and a well documented build release process is excellent practice.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>> Matteo
>>
>> --
>> Matteo Merli
>> <mme...@apache.org>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> (Starting a new thread to detach from the general website discussion)
>>>
>>> I think that it would be good to try to release a new Pulsar version ASAP,
>>> following the Apache release process and requirements.
>>>
>>> That would take the project out of the current limbo where we are in the
>>> incubator, but we can only point users to Yahoo releases of Pulsar.
>>>
>>> Once the 1st Apache release is ready, it would be easier to create new
>>> releases, since most of comments and feedback from the IPMC are related to
>>> release process and content of the artifacts. Once we establish that, the
>>> rest will be downhill.
>>>
>>> Questions:
>>>
>>> * Release Manager
>>>   Does for podlings work in the same way as for TLPs? Should we design a
>>> release manager?
>>>
>>> * Pending changes
>>>    What are the pending changes that *absolutely* need to go in
>>> 1.19-incubating release?
>>>
>>> * Versioning number
>>>   Since we're going from "pulsar" to "apache-pulsar" artifacts, as Dave
>>> suggested it could be the right moment to change versions. The options I
>>> see are :
>>>
>>>    - 1.19-incubating This is keeping the continuity in versioning and
>>> also signals that no major changes have been introduced.
>>>    - 2.0-incubating I think should be reserved for breaking changes
>>>    - 1.0-incubating I wouldn't go back in time
>>>
>>> Any suggestions?
>>>
>>> Open items:
>>> * Formalize the release procedure
>>>    It should be documented in the Wiki so that each committer should be
>>> able to perform a release.
>>>
>>> For all committers, please go through these documents to familiarize with
>>> the process, and provide feedback on the Pulsar release instruction wiki:
>>>
>>>   - https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>>   - http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
>>>   - http://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution.html
>>>   - http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html
>>>   - http://www.apache.org/dev/publishing-maven-artifacts.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Matteo
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matteo Merli
>>> <mme...@apache.org>
>>>
>

Reply via email to