[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] Release of libvirt 0.8.6



On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 05:47:01AM +1100, Justin Clift wrote:
> On 02/12/2010, at 5:26 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > Il giorno gio, 02/12/2010 alle 02.47 +1100, Justin Clift ha scritto:
> >> 
> >> Looks like it might be time to put some kind of regression testing in
> >> place, as a go/no-go release criteria. 
> > 
> > May I suggest a 1-week (or less) window without merge of new
> > features/improvements, announced on a separate (low-traffic) mailinglist
> > for packagers to test the release?
> > 
> > We'd then have time to test whether the code is fine for all of us or
> > not.
> 
> Concept wise, do you reckon something like this would work:
> 
>  + a new libvirt-announce mailing list, low trafic, purely for release
>     announcements and similar
> 
> Along with us announcing a '"release candidate" build through it (instead of the
> present approach).  If it looks good after a period of time (a week or something
> as you mentioned), then it gets re-released as the actual release.
> 
> If something turns up significantly broken, then we respin as a release candidate
> 2 and repeat the process.

I think this is really viable, because it implies we need another
week prior to creating the pre-release where we do what we currently
do with pre-release stabalization. With a monthly release cycle,
taking 2 weeks todo a release is too much of an time sink.

IMHO, we need to have

 - A official list of supported platforms / OS combinations
 - Run a test build on each combination before release
 - Actually follow the 'bug fixes' only rule leading upto release
   no matter how simple the new feature might appear.

Daniel


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]