[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Volunteering to be RM for 1.1.4 was Re: Backport voters required!

From: Max Bowsher <maxb_at_ukf.net>
Date: 2005-02-20 12:17:29 CET

Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 05:56:36PM -0600, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>> "Max Bowsher" <maxb@ukf.net> writes:
>>> Why do you ask?
>>> Ben Reser is our current RM, and has been since 1.0.2 - I haven't
>>> noticed him say anything about wanting to step down?
>> I think Justin just meant "Are you counting on Ben to do this release
>> at a particular time?"
> Partially correct. Unless Max wants to be the RM (which is really why I
> asked) or Ben has an issue with it (I'm going to venture not, but he can
> speak
> up if he does), I'd like to volunteer to be RM for 1.1.4 given that the
> items
> in STATUS are relatively minor. So, I think a 1.1.4 release may be a good
> time to try to review and clean up some of our release procedures.
> As I have previously stated, I think it'd be good for us to try to get
> more
> people knowledgable about the role of RM. Our goal should be that people
> who
> want to see a release out should be able to put the release out without
> relying upon anyone else - moving away from a 'dedicated' RM role. Hence,
> there should be enough documentation available about the process and
> involved
> steps so that any full committer can create the release.
> The initial stabs at this documentation are in notes/releases.txt, but
> without
> any other RMs having done a release recently, we need to test the
> procedures.
> I think the best strategy is to tag an RM who hasn't done it before. =)
> /me foolishly raises hand

I've no objections - go for it! :-)

>> But anyway, Ben has never been the bottleneck, voting has been the
>> bottleneck. So I think it makes sense for Max to start marshalling
>> votes even before Ben has publically committed to doing the RM work
>> for a given release.
> Based on the last 1.1.2/1.1.3 release, there was a discussion on-list
> about
> how to clean the release process up: namely, subjecting a release to
> review on
> dev@svn with a ~48 hour window before making the release public on
> tigris.org
> (this would have prevented the brown paper bag bug which caused 1.1.3),
> use of
> GPG signatures to 'vote' on a release (so we can track who has voted),
> etc.

Hmm, guess this means I ought to actually start using my GPG key.

> One thing I guess I'll need to know is what timeframe Max was thinking of
> for
> a 1.1.4? In about two or three weeks? Sooner? That would help me plan
> my
> schedule a little bit better. -- justin

In about three weeks would be ideal, I think.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Feb 20 12:18:41 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.