Hi all,
I've been studying the release document and wading knee-deep through
signing and licensing and all the other requirements and have come up
with a checklist that needs to be done. Whilst it looks big i'm sure
it'll be reduced next time around once we've sorted everything out a
bit more. If anyone sees something that they can do feel free to let
me know and jump right in.
-licence audit
-name the release - has to have 'incubating' in the name e.g.:
apache-wave-incubating
Packages
-Check that compressed artifacts unpack correctly
-Check that the documentation is readable
-Check distributed libraries
-Check licenses for libraries are distributed together with any
applicable NOTICES
-Check that licenses comply with incubator policy
-Check that licenses comply with project policy
-Check that LICENSE and NOTICE documents contain required sections
-Check that any cryptographic dependencies satisfy export
regulations
-Check copyright notices:
-Licenses missing from source files
-Source files with other licenses which are not mentioned in
LICENSE
-Check current policy on headers that all comply
-Check incubator requirements
-Check disclaimer is distributed
-Check status document
Source Package
-Check build instructions exist and that source builds using these
instructions
-Check license headers are correctly applied
-Check for version control files
-Check that source is exported from tag
OpenPGP keys
-Check KEYS file contains signing key
-Check key has been uploaded to regular public key servers
-proof documentation/check it is up to date
-tag in subversion
-how to name tags
-release documentation
-release notes - include description of project
-CHANGES can use svn log
-build process in README
-dependancies to build
-any backwards compatibility issues
-STATUS document
-LICENCE file - needs to include apache licence + any licence from
depend.
-incubator disclaimer in DISCLAIMER
-NOTICE file
Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
This product includes software developed at
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
-compress release
-tar.gz for unix
-zip for windows
-should unpack to different names e.g. foo-src for source, foo for
binary
-dependencies
-what is optional/required
-where to find them if not included in package
-min/max versions
-sign the release (md5 hashes and the like)
see: http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html
-upload it to dist/incubator folder
-release needs to be:
-owned by incubator group
-be group writable
-be readonly to the world
eg:
find . -type f -exec chmod 664 {} \;
find . -type d -exec chmod 775 {} \;
chgrp -R incubator *
-do we want release notes/readmes/changes in with the release?
-decide on layout eg: http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/
-each type in it's own directory
-symlinks to root directory for ease of access
-can edit above and below the index using HEADER.html & FOOTER.html
-delete old releases
-create release download page. see:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release-download-pages.html
-announce to pmc for voting
-on general incubator list
-prefix with [VOTE]
-tally votes and reply with [RESULT] prefix
-announce the release
-should be signed with the key used to sign the release
-from @apache.org address
-document all the steps/create a release build script
On 9/12/12, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
> I think that would be great!
> As Ali already mentioned - there's a WIki on the subject -
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
> The preferable way to release it - would be by creating a debian package -
> similar to what was done at kune.cc (which is Apache Wave fork) -
> https://gitorious.org/kune/trunk/trees/master/debian
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Angus Turner <h...@theangus.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I've been a lurker on this list ever since Wave came to Apache. I've been
>> following it since the sandbox days and have been interested the whole
>> way.
>> Once it went open source I found I couldn't really contribute as java
>> isn't
>> really my forte. This looks like a perfect opportunity though and i'll
>> glad
>> jump in and help out by taking up release manager. I've got not a clue
>> what
>> it involves but i'm a pretty quick learner.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Angus Turner
>> h...@theangus.org
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > So, are we discussing? We *need* to start discussing this, as we cannot
>> > stay still in the incubator forever.
>> >
>> > Any thoughts?
>> >
>> > Note, you don't need to be a committer to be a release manager. Maybe
>> > this is your chance to get more involved.
>> >
>> > Upayavira
>> >
>> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012, at 01:28 PM, Upayavira wrote:
>> > > Thanks. Now that we've said to the board that we're discussing what
>> > > it
>> > > takes to make a release, perhaps we'd better do it :-)
>> > >
>> > > Is anyone prepared to take on the job of release manager?
>> > >
>> > > Note, code quality is of no consequence in relation to releasing in
>> > > the
>> > > incubator. What's needed is to show that licensing/etc is all handled
>> > > correctly. If folks don't want to make a release public, it can be
>> > > produced, vetted by the incubator PMC, and then dropped rather than
>> > > published. Having said that, I consider it to be worth while to
>> > > release
>> > > an alpha version of the code even if it isn't complete, as it may
>> > > help
>> > > draw in additional developers to help fill in the missing features.
>> > >
>> > > Thoughts?
>> > >
>> > > Upayavira
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012, at 08:21 AM, Yuri Z wrote:
>> > > > I updated the Wiki for Sep 2012 report. Please feel free to
>> add/edit.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Max pane <your...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Hello,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Even i would like to involve in Administration,Under michael,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Regards
>> > > > > Jack
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > IIRC, the June report focused more on development issues than
>> > > > > > on
>> > > > > > community/graduation issues, and it is the latter that the
>> > incubator PMC
>> > > > > > and board are interested in,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Regarding releases, we can release now. Call it alpha-0.0.1.
>> > > > > > The
>> > point
>> > > > > > of releasing is twofold: to show that all licensing issues have
>> > been
>> > > > > > resolved (reviews undertaken by yourselves and incubator PMC
>> before
>> > > > > > artifacts are released) and to draw in new developers. Folks
>> like.
>> > > > > > Having a concrete baseline to work against. Also, two open
>> > > > > > source
>> > maxims
>> > > > > > to consider: release early, release often. This encourages us
>> > > > > > to
>> > get our
>> > > > > > stuff out there early, we'll get better feedback that way.
>> Another
>> > one I
>> > > > > > like is "great ideas and bad code builds community". That is,
>> when
>> > > > > > developers see incomplete code, their response is often to help
>> if
>> > x it.
>> > > > > > Showing folks the current state of wave code, flaws and all,
>> might
>> > > > > > actually have the eft of bringing more people to the project.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > We're I to write a report, it would be something like:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > "One new committee added. Discussions (somewhat stalled) on
>> > additional
>> > > > > > committers. The next major milestone regarding graduation is to
>> > make a
>> > > > > > release. The current codebase is not considered mature enough
>> for a
>> > > > > > useful release, however, the community is discussing what is
>> > required to
>> > > > > > make one, both to better understand the licensing status of our
>> > > > > > codebase, and as a means to draw in additional developers and
>> thus
>> > speed
>> > > > > > up development."
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Upayavira
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sat, Sep 8, 2012, at 10:02 PM, Ali Lown wrote:
>> > > > > > > Looking at the June report, we can copy-paste most of the
>> > contents for
>> > > > > > > the September report.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > The items listed as 'most important issues' are still
>> > > > > > > relevant,
>> > as are
>> > > > > > > the 'more developments not yet finished but in progress'.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > To address 'Ross Gardlers's comments, it is probably worth
>> > noting that
>> > > > > > > I was voted in to the project.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > The WIAB server hardly seems stable enough yet to produce an
>> > actual
>> > > > > > > release (which seems to be the main thing missing for us to
>> > graduate
>> > > > > > > from my understanding).
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > @Michael: as project lead (according to Jira), it is probably
>> > best to
>> > > > > > > leave liaising with the board (via the reports) to you.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Ali
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On 8 September 2012 21:39, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Wave folks,
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > We're overdue with our three-monthly incubator/board
>> > > > > > > > report,
>> > it was
>> > > > > due
>> > > > > > > > last Wednesday (6 Sept).
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Do we have a volunteer to write one, and soon?
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Remember, it should be focused on what Wave needs to do to
>> > graduate,
>> > > > > > > > rather than on technical matters.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Thanks,
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Upayavira
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> >
>>
>
--
Thanks
Angus Turner
angusisf...@gmail.com
