Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
2008/11/18 "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > While I'm happy that Barry has automated his part to a high degree, > my part is, unfortunately, much less automated. I could personally > automate the build process a bit more, but part of it is also testing > of the installers, which is manual. Martin, maybe we can help you with the installers testing. While I don't have a clue about compiling complex software in Windows (and also want to stay away from that), I have a virtualbox with a win xp in my workstation, so I could try an installer. Maybe you could put a wiki page somewhere with a small recipe about what to look when testing an installer, and then produce all the versions, upload to it, and alert us here. So we go, download one of them, try it, and then mark it as tested with our name (maybe we can look after two or three testers per installer). I don't know if this will be quicker, but surely will lower your workload regarding this, which is a good thing. Regards, -- .Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/ ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
Martin v. Löwis wrote: > While I'm happy that Barry has automated his part to a high degree, > my part is, unfortunately, much less automated. I could personally > automate the build process a bit more, but part of it is also testing > of the installers, which is manual. Maybe you could delegate a lot of the testing to competent volunteers? That's not the issue - I don't mind spending that time. However, it means that several hours pass between starting the release process, and making the binaries available - during this time, users always complain why the Windows binaries are not released yet. With additional volunteers, availability of the binaries would lag even more behind the release announcement. Installer tests can definitely be automated, and there is also a Python API to the virtualbox VM. I wonder if it would be possible to automate testing all the installers in various scenarios - each running simultaneously in a VM. Michael [1] Doesn't Windows have a way to send synthetic GUI events to a program? There ought to be a way to really script that, as the Python installer process presumbly doesn't change much from release to release. I also need to involve different machines, e.g. XP machines and Vista machines, and machines that have Visual Studio installed and machines that don't. Plus, I need to log into each machine in different ways: as admin user and non-admin user. The automated GUI testing only really works for a logged-in user. Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/fuzzyman%40voidspace.org.uk -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
Michael Foord writes: > Installer tests can definitely be automated, and there is also a Python > API to the virtualbox VM. I wonder if it would be possible to automate > testing all the installers in various scenarios - each running > simultaneously in a VM. Now that would be an impressive tour de force! ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] 2.6.1 and 3.0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Nov 18, 2008, at 9:52 AM, Christian Heimes wrote: Barry Warsaw wrote: Actually, I've wanted to do timed releases, though I think monthly is unrealistic. Maybe every two months is about the right time frame. Timed releases are nice because everybody then knows when a patch is due, from developers to downstream consumers. From my point of view bi-monthly release are too much. For a ?.?.1 release two months are fine because several issues are found by 3rd party authors. But after that a release every quarter is sufficient. * .1 release two months after the .0 release * .2, .3, .4 and .5 release every quarter * about here the next minor release gets out * .6 and further releases after 6 months when necessary Timed releases have a lot of advantages, and I would like to see if we can adopt them and realize these benefits. What I like most about them is that everyone knows what's happening when and can coordinate efforts. Developers will know automatically (no reminders or alarms) when the next release is happening, so they can schedule what they want to do more easily. Release experts can block out the appropriate time on their schedules and plan more efficiently. Downstream consumers have a better idea of when updates are available and can lobby for certain critical bugs to be fixed in a timely and predictable manner. I think 6 months is too long between releases -- it might as well not be timed. It sounds like the Windows side is a bit of a pain, and since we're all busy, one month is probably too soon. That's why I proposed bi-monthly. I really want our releases to be predictable. I don't think we have to worry about nothing getting committed to the trees in 2 months time. - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSSQspHEjvBPtnXfVAQIfwwP8DzaIge8b1rL9/zACiwZ5nOn9S5d+ng+p zjSSvDKgfxX5kEMfUQQuJgI6GIOPvUm0wsmdZnH5f5AD86/1Qz1ugsBkHXO6BWWl LEI2jNjsIU9m1icQkQSnENxJoI5BFFA9upewT1zwo9md4cErzQLiK+WQrblu1hXE GKaxW0Xrva4= =ZI9e -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Nov 18, 2008, at 12:46 PM, Georg Brandl wrote: Barry Warsaw schrieb: On Nov 18, 2008, at 8:07 AM, Christian Heimes wrote: Barry Warsaw wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martin suggests, and I agree, that we should release Python 3.0 final and 2.6.1 at the same time. Makes sense to me. That would mean that Python 2.6.1 should be ready on 03-Dec (well, if Python 3.0 is ready then!). Should we release 2.6.1rc1, too? Do we need rc's for point releases? I think we did them in the past. There probably never was a significant change between the rc and the final, but Murphy dictates that once you stop doing the rc, the final will be embarrassingly broken :) True. If the rc's are actually tested and help avoid embarrassment I'm all for them. If it's just extra work that few will test, then let's skip them and just do brown bag releases if necessary. - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSSQuGHEjvBPtnXfVAQJCfwQAky+ORhR0LaoZ0nevGBkEkl5LZbP0+A4a p0puGCnxuY6DVqx38dJUPLqt+wle+Zw9QX4PhhaalbTWyOQScKQk0p0CxagLnTeG GvlyTQLUM9RxFzolnzcY8mU8ewGnCJp16d7TR40AmMZ/geV/xMDzxL+tPKwiq/5p C4j+VmFHnMU= =EGqf -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Nov 18, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: From my point of view bi-monthly release are too much. For a ?.?.1 release two months are fine because several issues are found by 3rd party authors. But after that a release every quarter is sufficient. * .1 release two months after the .0 release * .2, .3, .4 and .5 release every quarter * about here the next minor release gets out * .6 and further releases after 6 months when necessary In the past, we had been striving for releases every 6 month. This was already very difficult to achieve. While I'm happy that Barry has automated his part to a high degree, my part is, unfortunately, much less automated. I could personally automate the build process a bit more, but part of it is also testing of the installers, which is manual. Martin, I'm keen on figuring out a way to reduce your workload, and also to coordinate releases better between us. I /think/ with timed releases I can tag a little early and give you something to work on so that the actual release is a matter of fiddling web pages and sending an announcement. - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSSQwbnEjvBPtnXfVAQIOuAP/fxzFpp886TordGNdd4tusqasL/VK2lpr wbhcfwh5TQbVhkhi9CVUFa7BNXCpgxG1nqWT9+ynSdNKIYKnK8kkjRE7FhEYantP TYkuRGI+2DznKjRBtVNXJq+JNktARWKhQwFkc0AmqooCYvhxqt9T5AkEgN4jRn4s YBLaex4g3rA= =Oi0b -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
> Martin, maybe we can help you with the installers testing. Thanks for the offer. See my other message, though - this is not the point. If everything goes well, offloading testing just means that I have to wait some time for the testers to come back, and do other stuff meanwhile. For the majority of alpha and beta releases, something went wrong each time. A file was forgotten to be included in the installer generator, causing it to be missing on the target system. I forgot to perform a manual build step, causing the installer to fail, and so on. Then I have to debug the problem, and restart the production process from scratch. Offloading to testers in this case would just mean that I wait much longer until I can release, and it might not be possible to complete the build within a single day. > I don't know if this will be quicker, but surely will lower your > workload regarding this, which is a good thing. Thanks again - but I do typically find the time to do the release (if not, it gets delayed by another day). Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
> Installer tests can definitely be automated, and there is also a Python > API to the virtualbox VM. I wonder if it would be possible to automate > testing all the installers in various scenarios - each running > simultaneously in a VM. I do use VMs, yes. However, they don't run on my workstation - which is 32-bit XP. It might be possible to automate it, but IMO, the effort of setting this up would be higher than the actual time spend in doing it manually, assuming we have no more than a dozen releases per year. Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
> Martin, I'm keen on figuring out a way to reduce your workload, and also > to coordinate releases better between us. I /think/ with timed releases > I can tag a little early and give you something to work on so that the > actual release is a matter of fiddling web pages and sending an > announcement. Again - the work load is not so much an issue at the moment, and I expect it to be reduced even after 3.0 is finally released and 2.5 retired. I would indeed appreciate tighter coordination. Anthony's process differed from yours primarily in him waiting for the release announcements until the binaries are actually available. That might mean that a day or two might pass, but it did help to remove the feeling of working under tight deadlines. Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Nov 19, 2008, at 2:18 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: Martin, I'm keen on figuring out a way to reduce your workload, and also to coordinate releases better between us. I /think/ with timed releases I can tag a little early and give you something to work on so that the actual release is a matter of fiddling web pages and sending an announcement. Again - the work load is not so much an issue at the moment, and I expect it to be reduced even after 3.0 is finally released and 2.5 retired. I would indeed appreciate tighter coordination. Anthony's process differed from yours primarily in him waiting for the release announcements until the binaries are actually available. That might mean that a day or two might pass, but it did help to remove the feeling of working under tight deadlines. Let's try this for 3.0rc4 then. I think all it means is that I won't push the new pages or make the announcement until you verify that the Windows builds are ready and available. We can still use python- committers to coordinate when that will happen, and I'll still do all the release mechanics from my end as normal. It's okay if the announcement happens Friday or over the weekend. I will also try to get up early to do the release before my work day starts, to better coordinate with Euro time. So expect me on #python- dev tomorrow (my morning). Will that work for you? - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSSRrAnEjvBPtnXfVAQJiDwP/ZcbHnwkvWligaP2a3OXEmZ30GZoG1NQn +Lj/j4YNANkhxZ4Vgg9gkMH3mQ+eTwWdqr1/VM3LTW+fFXhdtAaAG1NsvHAlkAE0 N+DgEOEv4aMuO6MZplv/1kh4WeFC7SsnEX7bLext0QZITdBaL65dUN8Kt8G/ZeTG w3lQ01nBFqY= =InnO -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
> In which case why not just hold the release until all installers are > available? That is how Anthony Baxter handled things, indeed, and I would appreciate if we would return to that procedure. > Or are the complainers Python developers who know what goes on behind > the scenes? No - typically outsiders, who report that the links are broken (if the links get updated and the files are missing), or that the links are old (if the links are not updated). I think these people also try to be helpful (in addition to being frustrated that the release announcement is meaningless to them, and that they have to poll the release page). >> With additional volunteers, availability of the binaries would lag even >> more behind the release announcement. >> > I really appreciate the dedicated work you put in to the Windows > installers (as I am sure many others do also), but I wouldn't want to > saddle you with it indefinitely. How well is the procedure documented? IIRC, Christian Heimes did one of the alpha or beta releases, with what little documentation is available, so it's definitely doable. The tricky part really is when it breaks (which it does more often than not), in which case you need to understand msi.py, for which you need to understand MSI. IMO, the Microsoft is excellent (in being fairly precise), but the learning curve is high. The mechanical part of it can is completely automated - we produce daily MSI files in a buildbot slave (which may or may not work - I haven't checked in a while) > I > ask this in hopes that you aren't a potential single point of failure in > the release process. I think several of the "Windows people" could jump in, not just Christian. That would be best done in a beta release or release candidate, since one does get things wrong the first time. Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
> I will also try to get up early to do the release before my work day > starts, to better coordinate with Euro time. So expect me on > #python-dev tomorrow (my morning). > > Will that work for you? If you delay the announcement until the binaries are ready, you should feel free to work on it whenever it suits you best, as far as I'm concerned (of course, to coordinate with Georg, you might still prefer to work during the European daylight). I'll be busy with lectures tomorrow most of the day, and can't start working on the installer before 14:00 UTC (which I think is 9:00 your time). Around what time would you expect to have the tag set? Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0
Barry Warsaw wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Let's try this for 3.0rc4 then. The current release is rc2. Skipping rc3 would confuse people'-) ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
