Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Ready for our yearly final daze?

[David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> 1. if we're building a "release release" that
won't be changed at 
> all, we'll need to mark the build as an "R" build even thought
it is
> actually RC4? Is that ok to do given that we don't yet have release
review?

Most people name it RC4 while building, then rename it
R during quiet week. 

> 2. For the build alias I was thinking that there
wasn't a final 
> qualifier on the build alias, i.e. "0.9.0", not "0.9.0RC4"
or "0.9.0R1"? 

Yikes! All builds/deliveries need 4 part version numbers.
Always. For OSGi and p2 repositories (I know, maven doesn't, I hear). And
the qualifier part needs to be ever increasing. I always get this confused,
but pretty sure "0.9.0R1" is  less than "0.9.0.RC4"
(since "1" < "C" lexographically) so would not install
as you expect. That's why most of us (but not all) use something that involved
date/time stamp. See http://wiki.eclipse.org/Version_Numbering
(And, I say "Yikes" only because "we"
must not be educating everyone well :) 

> 3. Given below, we won't deploy our RC4 build to
http://<project>/
> updates/release. Should we then put it in e.g. milestones/RC4, mark
> the aggregator for such, and then later at the appropriate time, 
> flip the switch for the aggregator?

Exactly right. 

Thanks for asking! Keep 'em coming. 







From:      
 Miles Parker <milesparker@xxxxxxxxx>
To:      
 Cross project issues
<cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:      
 06/06/2011 06:20 PM
Subject:    
   Re: [cross-project-issues-dev]
Ready for our yearly final daze?
Sent by:    
   cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

I'm wondering about how w2e handle this move as well.
I'm sorry if this is covered in the document and I just didn't parse it
well but I'm in a daze...

1. if we're building a "release release" that
won't be changed at all, we'll need to mark the build as an "R"
build even thought it is actually RC4? Is that ok to do given that we don't
yet have release review?
2. For the build alias I was thinking that there wasn't
a final qualifier on the build alias, i.e. "0.9.0", not "0.9.0RC4"
or "0.9.0R1"? 
3. Given below, we won't deploy our RC4 build to http://<project>/updates/release.
Should we then put it in e.g. milestones/RC4, mark the aggregator for such,
and then later at the appropriate time, flip the switch for the aggregator?


On Jun 6, 2011, at 2:14 AM, Dennis Hübner wrote:

Hello David,
I have a question related to the "Final Build 6/10 -- end of RC4"
part. Final Daze document says:

...The "final build" means that all content must be frozen; features,
plugins, versions, etc. This content might still have an "RC"
in zip file name, be on a "temporary" site (e.g. ...<project>/milestones)
and later (such on during quiet week) renamed and moved to a "permanent"
site (e.g. ...<project>/repository) but during that rename and move,
there should be no change to plugins, features, versions, repository
metadata (artifacts.xml/jar files and content.xml/jar files), nor anything
that would effect checksums.

So the RC4 p2 repository will contains a corresponding mirrorsURL http://<project>/milestones/<version>
 (see http://wiki.eclipse.org/IT_Infrastructure_Doc#Enable_mirrors_.2F_use_mirrorsURL_for_my_p2_repo.3F)
and version specific p2.statsURI property http://www.eclipse.org/<project>/<version>
(see http://wiki.eclipse.org/Equinox_p2_download_stats)
Means we can't simply move the repository from one location to another,
we have to change the artifacts.xml accordingly.
This will hopefully effect the checksums.
Any suggestion how to handle this?

Best regards,
Dennis.

Am 06.06.11 04:52, schrieb David M Williams: 
I've prepared a draft of our "Final
Daze" document for Indigo: 

http://wiki.eclipse.org/Indigo/Final_Daze

I say "draft" because even though it is very similar to previous
yers, I thought a few sections were suffering from generation loss, from
repeated copying year to year, so I tried to restructure it a bit, and
hope I didn't lose anything. If those of you mentioned by name in the document
(Markus, Kim, Denis, Nathan, ... ) can take a look and make sure I've correctly
captured all the final "todo items", I'd appreciate it. Let's
target, say, Thursday of this week (6/9), at the latest, to have it reviewed
and updated, so it will be final, before we are. 

But everyone participating in Indigo can/should read it now (soon) to a)
see if anything is unclear (and ask, if so) and b) make sure you know what
is expected from you these final few weeks.  And, it goes without
saying, anyone is welcome to improve the document or clarify things, add
helpful links, or add concrete steps I've missed. 

The most pressing expectation is RC4 ... that RC4 is it, final build ...
this week, we expect our final builds, final aggregation, final EPP packages,
no missing IP related files. 

This has caused some confusion in years past, and I was going to post a
"remember RC4 is final" note last week, but it seemed kind of
cruel to do that, in the middle of so many other problems getting our RC3
done. But, it is an important concept, and hopefully catches no one by
surprise. It is essential we all get "final" this week, so that
there is a "quiet week" buffer before we release. From what I
can tell, the infrastructure it relatively back to normal. Be sure to quickly
report any difficulties. Clearly if we had problems this week, like we
did last week, we would have to eat into our quiet week buffer and then
I would begin to lose sleep. :) 

Sill lots to do, I know, but it will be worth it when finished! And, a
year from now ... we will all be wishing for the good 'ol daze. :) 

Thanks everyone ... questions welcome ... help each other ... test early,
test often. 


_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev



-- 
Dennis Hübner

Softwareentwickler

Mobil:   0151 173 96 707

http://www.itemis.de/

itemis AG
Am Germaniahafen 1
24143 Kiel

Rechtlicher Hinweis:
Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 20621
Vorstand: Wolfgang Neuhaus, Jens Wagener, Dr. Georg Pietrek
Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Burkhard Igel (Vors.), Stephan Grollmann, Michael
Neuhaus 

_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev