[GRASS-PSC] [GRASS-dev] RFC 4: Release procedure

[Anna Petrášová]

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Martin Landa <landa.martin at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> 2015-10-20 9:36 GMT+02:00 Moritz Lennert <mlennert at club.worldonline.be>:
>
> > The idea of the RC2 was to provoke some more last-minute testing as some
> > fixes might have been introduced after RC1 and I'm not sure how many
> people
> > test the release branch between RC's. This way we make it more prominent
> and
> > can send out a call to everyone to please test RC2. This does not mean
> that
> > RC2 cannot be identical to final. It's just a last chance to spot any
> > serious issues.
> >
> > So, I would plead for leaving it in. 5 days more or less is not that
> much,
> > or ?
>
> I understand the point, on the other hand it's extra work for release
> manager and packager which would sometimes make sense to avoid and be
> so not strict in the way that RC2 step could be optional (or skipped
> if no objection from community). On the other hand we can add more
> steps (RC3, RC4, ...) if it will be necessary in the case of extra
> complicated release.
>
> Any comments, ideas? Thanks, Martin
>

I agree with Martin, I guess it's quite a bit of work involved in it and it
seems we now started to release more often than in previous years, which is
a good trend. So I would rather release more often with less RCs.

Anna

>
> --
> Martin Landa
> http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/gwiki/Landa
> http://gismentors.cz/mentors/landa
> _______________________________________________
> grass-dev mailing list
> grass-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-psc/attachments/20151020/eac4f954/attachment.html>