Post-3.0 git branch and version numbering
|
View:
New views
9 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
 |
Post-3.0 git branch and version numbering
by Galen Charlton
::
Rate this Message:
Hi,
Congratulations to all on Koha 3.0 stable! But, no rest for the weary... To get the transition to 3.2 started, I plan to do the following later today: [1] Create a 3.0-maintenance branch from the current master HEAD. Future 3.0 packages and bugfix releases (e.g., 3.0.1) will be based on this branch. [2] Make several changes in HEAD to switch to 3.2 mode, including: - changing version string in kohaversion.pl to 3.01.00.000. - committing a separate copy of the 3.0-stable kohastructure.sql to t/data/db_schemas/ for use by future test cases that will validate the database update mechanism. Since a stable 3.2 will be months away, for current work I suggest we stick with using 3.1 as the version number, following the Linux kernel convention that an odd subrevision number signifies an unstable development version. Regards, Galen -- Galen Charlton VP, Research & Development, LibLime galen.charlton@... p: 1-888-564-2457 x709 skype: gmcharlt _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel |
|
|
Re: Post-3.0 git branch and version numbering
by Chris Cormack-6
::
Rate this Message:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 1:53 AM, Galen Charlton
<galen.charlton@...> wrote: > Hi, > > Congratulations to all on Koha 3.0 stable! But, no rest for the weary... > > To get the transition to 3.2 started, I plan to do the following later today: > > [1] Create a 3.0-maintenance branch from the current master HEAD. > Future 3.0 packages and bugfix releases (e.g., 3.0.1) will be based on > this branch. Sounds good to me > > [2] Make several changes in HEAD to switch to 3.2 mode, including: > > - changing version string in kohaversion.pl to 3.01.00.000. > - committing a separate copy of the 3.0-stable kohastructure.sql to > t/data/db_schemas/ for use by future test cases that will validate the > database update mechanism. > Cool > Since a stable 3.2 will be months away, for current work I suggest we > stick with using 3.1 as the version number, following the Linux kernel > convention that an odd subrevision number signifies an unstable > development version. > > Yep, thats what we have always done in the past, I think 3.0 is the first release that wasnt preceded with a 2.9.x (or its equivalent) Chris _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel |
|
|
Re: Post-3.0 git branch and version numbering
by Chris Cormack-6
::
Rate this Message:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 1:53 AM, Galen Charlton
<galen.charlton@...> wrote: > Hi, > > Congratulations to all on Koha 3.0 stable! But, no rest for the weary... > > To get the transition to 3.2 started, I plan to do the following later today: > I guess the next question is who is doing the release Maintainers role, for 3.0? The last time there was discussion on this on irc (on the 7/7/2008). Biblibre offered to fill the role. Does that offer still stand? If so, here's one vote for them to take up that role, with Galen release manager for 3.1 (which will become 3.2 when its stable). Chris _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel |
|
|
Re: Post-3.0 git branch and version numbering
by Galen Charlton
::
Rate this Message:
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Chris Cormack <chris@...> wrote: > I guess the next question is who is doing the release Maintainers role, for 3.0? > The last time there was discussion on this on irc (on the 7/7/2008). > Biblibre offered to fill the role. > Does that offer still stand? If so, here's one vote for them to take > up that role, with Galen release manager for 3.1 (which will become > 3.2 when its stable). As far as I know, the following people or groups have expressed willingness to maintain 3.0: - Josh, per the customary transition from 3.0 release manager. - BibLibre, in (I assume) the person of Paul or Henri-Damien. LibLime would support either option. If Josh does it, he will have plenty of time to devote to it, as he will no longer have the full release manager responsibilities and is also looking to hand over the translation manager's portfolio to somebody else. If I remember correctly, Henri has also expressed willingness to be the QA manager for 3.2. Because of the potential workload, if BibLibre were to also take up 3.0 RMaint, I'd ask to them to confirm whether they're willing to do both, giving proper attention to each. If not, then either the 3.0 RMaint should default to Josh or we should put out another call for 3.2 QA. Regards, Galen -- Galen Charlton VP, Research & Development, LibLime galen.charlton@... p: 1-888-564-2457 x709 skype: gmcharlt _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel |
|
|
Re: Post-3.0 git branch and version numbering
by Chris Cormack-6
::
Rate this Message:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 4:02 AM, Galen Charlton
<galen.charlton@...> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Chris Cormack > <chris@...> wrote: > >> I guess the next question is who is doing the release Maintainers role, for 3.0? >> The last time there was discussion on this on irc (on the 7/7/2008). >> Biblibre offered to fill the role. >> Does that offer still stand? If so, here's one vote for them to take >> up that role, with Galen release manager for 3.1 (which will become >> 3.2 when its stable). > > As far as I know, the following people or groups have expressed > willingness to maintain 3.0: > > - Josh, per the customary transition from 3.0 release manager. > - BibLibre, in (I assume) the person of Paul or Henri-Damien. > > LibLime would support either option. If Josh does it, he will have > plenty of time to devote to it, as he will no longer have the full > release manager responsibilities and is also looking to hand over the > translation manager's portfolio to somebody else. If I remember > correctly, Henri has also expressed willingness to be the QA manager > for 3.2. Because of the potential workload, if BibLibre were to also > take up 3.0 RMaint, I'd ask to them to confirm whether they're willing > to do both, giving proper attention to each. If not, then either the > 3.0 RMaint should default to Josh or we should put out another call > for 3.2 QA. > Not answering for Biblibre, as Im sure they will reply themselves, but Biblibre is more than one person, so even if they were wanting to do QA for 3.2 (which im not sure they do), its unlikely it would be the same person. Just as for liblime it wouldn't be the same person. So I guess im saying the same question applies to both. Personally I'd like to see the roles spread around as many organisations as possible. Just my 2 cents Chris _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel |
|
|
Re: Post-3.0 git branch and version numbering
by Henri-Damien LAURENT-3
::
Rate this Message:
Galen Charlton a écrit :
> Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Chris Cormack > <chris@...> wrote: > >> I guess the next question is who is doing the release Maintainers role, for 3.0? >> The last time there was discussion on this on irc (on the 7/7/2008). >> Biblibre offered to fill the role. >> Does that offer still stand? If so, here's one vote for them to take >> up that role, with Galen release manager for 3.1 (which will become >> 3.2 when its stable). >> > As far as I know, the following people or groups have expressed > willingness to maintain 3.0: > > - Josh, per the customary transition from 3.0 release manager. > - BibLibre, in (I assume) the person of Paul or Henri-Damien. > > LibLime would support either option. If Josh does it, he will have > plenty of time to devote to it, as he will no longer have the full > release manager responsibilities and is also looking to hand over the > translation manager's portfolio to somebody else. If I remember > correctly, Henri has also expressed willingness to be the QA manager > for 3.2. Because of the potential workload, if BibLibre were to also > take up 3.0 RMaint, I'd ask to them to confirm whether they're willing > to do both, giving proper attention to each. If not, then either the > 3.0 RMaint should default to Josh or we should put out another call > for 3.2 QA. > a while back, we are in fact not candidate for the QA management position in 3.2. So the position is indeed open: anyone volunteering ? But I'm really willing to be Release Maintainer for 3.0. We fully support what Chris said about the roles being spread around as many organisations as possible. By the same token we support his candidacy to be the translation manager. But I also think we should be clear about what those positions would mean. Specifically, these roles (Q&A, RM for 3.1, RMaint for 3.0, Translation) should have ssh access to the git repository via a key so that they can do what their position requires them to do, with sign-off of their commits so that RM can be informed in real time of what has been done. -- Henri-Damien LAURENT _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel |
|
|
Re: Post-3.0 git branch and version numbering
by Galen Charlton
::
Rate this Message:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 4:19 AM, Henri-Damien LAURENT <laurenthdl@...> wrote: > As far as we (BibLibre) are concerned, even though it was talked about > a while back, we are in fact not candidate for the QA management > position in 3.2. So the position is indeed open: anyone volunteering ? Joshua may be a volunteer; I'll let him toss his hat in the ring directly if he chooses. But going beyond the QA position, I would be interested in setting up a mechanism for distributing the review and signoff of important patches across as many contributors as are willing to do it, which might ease the burden on the QA manager a bit. > But I'm really willing to be Release Maintainer for 3.0. Great. What are your plans (roughly speaking) for maintaining 3.0.x? > We fully support what Chris said about the roles being spread around as many > organisations as possible. > By the same token we support his candidacy to be the translation manager. As do we. > But I also think we should be clear about what those positions would mean. > Specifically, these roles (Q&A, RM for 3.1, RMaint for 3.0, > Translation) should have ssh access to the git repository via a key so > that they can do what their position requires them to do, with > sign-off of their commits so that RM can be informed in real time of > what has been done. This can be done on a branch-by-branch basis. In other words, we can set it up so that the 3.0 maintainer can push directly to the 3.0.x branch. Regards, Galen -- Galen Charlton VP, Research & Development, LibLime galen.charlton@... p: 1-888-564-2457 x709 skype: gmcharlt _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel |
|
|
Re: Post-3.0 git branch and version numbering
by Henri-Damien LAURENT-3
::
Rate this Message:
Galen Charlton a écrit :
> Hi, > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 4:19 AM, Henri-Damien LAURENT > <laurenthdl@...> wrote: > >> As far as we (BibLibre) are concerned, even though it was talked about >> a while back, we are in fact not candidate for the QA management >> position in 3.2. So the position is indeed open: anyone volunteering ? >> > Joshua may be a volunteer; I'll let him toss his hat in the ring > directly if he chooses. > But going beyond the QA position, I would be > interested in setting up a mechanism for distributing the review and > signoff of important patches across as many contributors as are > willing to do it, which might ease the burden on the QA manager a bit. > Good Idea. >> But I'm really willing to be Release Maintainer for 3.0. >> > > Great. What are your plans (roughly speaking) for maintaining 3.0.x? > Stay tuned for bugs on rel30 and HEAD, and keep track of those who are on both versions. File bugs when they are only sent on lists. cherry pick patches which adress rel30 bugs. If a patch is sent related to branch 3.0, then resend the patch for branch3.1 In that purpose, maybe building a smolder server for 3.0 and revive information nightly could be good. Or maybe I could use Andrew's one if allowed. Comments welcome. >> We fully support what Chris said about the roles being spread around as many >> organisations as possible. >> By the same token we support his candidacy to be the translation manager. >> > As do we. > >> But I also think we should be clear about what those positions would mean. >> Specifically, these roles (Q&A, RM for 3.1, RMaint for 3.0, >> Translation) should have ssh access to the git repository via a key so >> that they can do what their position requires them to do, with >> sign-off of their commits so that RM can be informed in real time of >> what has been done. >> > > This can be done on a branch-by-branch basis. In other words, we can > set it up so that the 3.0 maintainer can push directly to the 3.0.x > branch. > What about QA manager for position, if he were outside from Liblime and BibLibre ? Chris spoke his plans on Translation. Having a website where patches would be fetched by RM seems to me a solution which will make the RM task heavier and quite tricky if some patches are to be replaced, or updated. Would it not be easier if he could push sthg on his remote branch with signing-off his patches, same for QA ? And then, RM would just have to merge those remote branches. my 2 cts. -- Henri-Damien LAURENT _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel |
|
|
Re: Post-3.0 git branch and version numbering
by Galen Charlton
::
Rate this Message:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Henri-Damien LAURENT <laurenthdl@...> wrote: > Galen Charlton a écrit : >> Joshua may be a volunteer; I'll let him toss his hat in the ring >> directly if he chooses. > > Would Joshua be volunteer both for QA and Release Maintainer ? I think it would be just for one or the other, but not both. >> Great. What are your plans (roughly speaking) for maintaining 3.0.x? >> > > Stay tuned for bugs on rel30 and HEAD, and keep track of those who are on > both versions. > File bugs when they are only sent on lists. > cherry pick patches which adress rel30 bugs. > If a patch is sent related to branch 3.0, then resend the patch for > branch3.1 > In that purpose, maybe building a smolder server for 3.0 and revive > information nightly could be good. > Or maybe I could use Andrew's one if allowed. Once we've finished testing Andy's setup, LibLime would be willing to host a public smolder for the project that would handle test reports for both 3.0 and 3.2. > Comments welcome. This obviously depends on the bug counts and what the user community requests, but roughly speaking, how many bugfix releases of 3.0.x would you contemplate releasing, and on what schedule? >> This can be done on a branch-by-branch basis. In other words, we can >> set it up so that the 3.0 maintainer can push directly to the 3.0.x >> branch. >> > > OK then for Release Maintainer. > What about QA manager for position, if he were outside from Liblime and > BibLibre ? Is any such person volunteering? ;) > Having a website where patches would be fetched by RM seems to me a solution > which will make the RM task heavier and quite tricky if some patches are to > be replaced, or updated. Would it not be easier if he could push sthg on his > remote branch with signing-off his patches, same for QA ? And then, RM would > just have to merge those remote branches. If the QA manager maintains a tree containing validated patches that I can pull from, that would be useful. However, the mechanics of managing the git tree matter less to me than what I think the QA manager should do, which to mind my includes the following fundamental responsibilities: * reviewing patches and working with contributors to improve them * at the same time, keeping up with the flow of patches * working to distribute patch review among all interested contributors * proposing improvements to code or development practices to the developer community Regards, Galen -- Galen Charlton VP, Research & Development, LibLime galen.charlton@... p: 1-888-564-2457 x709 skype: gmcharlt _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@... http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
