On 7/10/06, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net> wrote:
> I dunno about others, but I find it kind of hard to keep track of the status
> of any one of our releases as it going through the release process.
> Generally speaking, I have just as much information as the release manager's
> most recent status email. I propose that we use our issue tracker to track
> release status.
>
> I'm envisioning something like the following:
>
> * After the typical "So, uh, you guys wanna roll a X.Y.Z release
> candidate this weekend?" email discussion, we file a new TASK
> issue (against a new 'releases' subcomponent) for rolling that release.
>
> * This issue has the nifty feature of a visible "assigned to" username.
> So, while we can make David Anderson the default owner of that
> subcomponent, in the event he gets busy, someone else can volunteer to
> take that release off his hands.
>
> * The status of the release is tracked via comments. This includes
> things like the location of the unblessed tarballs, signatures and
> testing reports of the tarballs, and so on. If we really want to
> we can use issue states, too: OPEN, STARTED, RESOLVED/FIXED (the
> tarballs are posted), VERIFIED (the signatures are all in), CLOSED,
> etc.
>
> * If there are bugs found which block the release, we can demonstrate
> this by making the release-tracking issues "depend on" the defect
> issues.
>
> Thoughts?
I like this idea. It would certainly lead to more visibility into
exactly where we are in the release process, and what's holding things
up...
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jul 10 16:43:21 2006