Hi,
I would like to suggest the following schedule for [arch]iso maintenance. The idea is to have dedicated time frames for each part and not to do everything on the last minute.
We aim for monthly iso image releases. This will mostly be the first weekend of every month. E.g. the next one will be build on November 3rd and announced the Sunday after.
For archiso itself I suggest we propose and discuss new features and patches within the first two weeks after a iso release. On the third week we need test these changes; only bugfix and minor patches are allowed here. Before the fourth week we should tag and release a new archiso package.
What do you think about this in general? Of course these are more guidelines than strict rules and I know that we very likely will miss those goals by a few days.
Greetings,
Pierre
Am 07.10.2012 12:23, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
For archiso itself I suggest we propose and discuss new features and patches within the first two weeks after a iso release. On the third week we need test these changes; only bugfix and minor patches are allowed here. Before the fourth week we should tag and release a new archiso package.
This means we need archiso branches. 'master' branch and 'release' branch or so.
In general I like it.
On Oct 7, 2012 12:23 PM, "Pierre Schmitz" pierre@archlinux.de wrote:
Hi,
I would like to suggest the following schedule for [arch]iso maintenance. The idea is to have dedicated time frames for each part and not to do everything on the last minute.
We aim for monthly iso image releases. This will mostly be the first weekend of every month. E.g. the next one will be build on November 3rd and announced the Sunday after.
For archiso itself I suggest we propose and discuss new features and patches within the first two weeks after a iso release. On the third week we need test these changes; only bugfix and minor patches are allowed here. Before the fourth week we should tag and release a new archiso package.
What do you think about this in general? Of course these are more guidelines than strict rules and I know that we very likely will miss those goals by a few days.
What about simply decoupling the git development from the actual releases? That is, add a tag in git whenever it is 'ready', and for our monthly releases we use the last tag rather than current head? Even better if we avoid tagging just before the release so there are no surprises.
Tom
Am 07.10.2012 12:30, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
On Oct 7, 2012 12:23 PM, "Pierre Schmitz" pierre@archlinux.de wrote:
What do you think about this in general? Of course these are more guidelines than strict rules and I know that we very likely will miss those goals by a few days.
What about simply decoupling the git development from the actual releases? That is, add a tag in git whenever it is 'ready', and for our monthly releases we use the last tag rather than current head? Even better if we avoid tagging just before the release so there are no surprises.
Yes, that was my initial idea and would also be nice. But we would still need regular archiso releases as we don't want to end up with one every other year. Arhciso might also need tochagnes to reflect changes in Arch itself. So decoupling it might be harder than integrating it with our release schedule.
But yes, my approach would suggest to tag archiso one to two weeks before an iso release. Of course this also means that we don't need to tag at all if we either have not enough changes or things are currently broken.
Greetings,
Pierre
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Pierre Schmitz pierre@archlinux.de wrote:
But yes, my approach would suggest to tag archiso one to two weeks before an iso release. Of course this also means that we don't need to tag at all if we either have not enough changes or things are currently broken.
Sounds reasonable.
-t
On 10/07/2012 07:23 AM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
Hi,
I would like to suggest the following schedule for [arch]iso maintenance. The idea is to have dedicated time frames for each part and not to do everything on the last minute.
We aim for monthly iso image releases. This will mostly be the first weekend of every month. E.g. the next one will be build on November 3rd and announced the Sunday after.
For archiso itself I suggest we propose and discuss new features and patches within the first two weeks after a iso release. On the third week we need test these changes; only bugfix and minor patches are allowed here. Before the fourth week we should tag and release a new archiso package.
What do you think about this in general? Of course these are more guidelines than strict rules and I know that we very likely will miss those goals by a few days.
Greetings,
Pierre
Sure, please do in this way.
Thanks
arch-releng@lists.archlinux.org