Community
Participate
Working Groups
I'm opening this bug to a) keep me from forgetting :) and b) document the "final steps" to officially release Juno SR2. The candidates builds are listed in bug 400107 but we don't make "R-builds" visible until 2/22. Next week, till 2/15 other teams will be finishing their RC4, then we have one quiet week (buffer), before official release on 2/22. I'll begin this work 2/18 so sites and zips can be mirroring, but those sites and zips won't be "visible" until 2/22.
I began to look at doing this "invisible promotion", so make sure the scripts were ready, and that understood them (the answer was "yes" :) But, one question that comes to mind is what to do with Equinox drop. For Kepler, for Equinox, we began to move away from the "number", using instead, labels such as "KeplerM5a", etc. instead of 3.9M5a. So, what to do for Juno SR2? To be most consistent with the current "latest release", its label would be "3.8.2". But, if we wanted to change to the "Release Train name" even for Juno if would be what? JunoSR2? Juno3.8.2? Regardless of the answer, the same question needs to be answered for Kepler so that might effect the decision now. In that case, the obvious choices would be "3.9", KeplerSR0, Kepler3.9, or, I guess, just "Kepler" (for a "first release").
Another reminder, as I look at the scripts, is that for Equinox, we don't actually promote until "the day of" the release. For Eclipse proper, we promote "early", but leave it hidden by the presence of a specially named file ('buildHidden') until the day of the release, which allows all those big zips to get well mirrored. But, it also requires the "top level" PHP page script to understand not to display entries with that file in them. Pretty sure this is how we did it, in the past, so as to not have to put that logic in the top level Equinox page (and, presumably, it is not in "high demand" so lack of mirrors doesn't hurt much). In practice, the usual scripts I run create the equinox promotion script, but name it with 'MANUAL' as the prefix, so on 2/22, I'd just change its name to the normal name such that John's cronjob would then pick it up. John, let me know if you want anything different this year.
(In reply to comment #1) > I began to look at doing this "invisible promotion", so make sure the > scripts were ready, and that understood them (the answer was "yes" :) > > But, one question that comes to mind is what to do with Equinox drop. For > Kepler, for Equinox, we began to move away from the "number", using instead, > labels such as "KeplerM5a", etc. instead of 3.9M5a. > > So, what to do for Juno SR2? To be most consistent with the current "latest > release", its label would be "3.8.2". I would keep the Juno SR2 labelled 3.8.2 to be consistent with the previous 3.8.1 release. > But, if we wanted to change to the > "Release Train name" even for Juno if would be what? JunoSR2? Juno3.8.2? I would label it Juno SR2 > > Regardless of the answer, the same question needs to be answered for Kepler > so that might effect the decision now. In that case, the obvious choices > would be "3.9", KeplerSR0, Kepler3.9, or, I guess, just "Kepler" (for a > "first release"). My vote is simply Kepler for the first release. Then Kepler SR1, Kepler SR2 etc. Not sure if you are omitting spaces for a reason in your choices. I would hope the label could have spaces even if the actual file name does not.
(In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #1) > > I began to look at doing this "invisible promotion", so make sure the > > scripts were ready, and that understood them (the answer was "yes" :) > > > > But, one question that comes to mind is what to do with Equinox drop. For > > Kepler, for Equinox, we began to move away from the "number", using instead, > > labels such as "KeplerM5a", etc. instead of 3.9M5a. > > > > So, what to do for Juno SR2? To be most consistent with the current "latest > > release", its label would be "3.8.2". > > I would keep the Juno SR2 labelled 3.8.2 to be consistent with the previous > 3.8.1 release. > > > But, if we wanted to change to the > > "Release Train name" even for Juno if would be what? JunoSR2? Juno3.8.2? > > I would label it Juno SR2 > Ok, but 3.8.2 is concrete answer for now. > > > > Regardless of the answer, the same question needs to be answered for Kepler > > so that might effect the decision now. In that case, the obvious choices > > would be "3.9", KeplerSR0, Kepler3.9, or, I guess, just "Kepler" (for a > > "first release"). > > My vote is simply Kepler for the first release. Then Kepler SR1, Kepler SR2 > etc. Not sure if you are omitting spaces for a reason in your choices. I > would hope the label could have spaces even if the actual file name does not. Currently not, the "label" is computed from "middle part" of build ID, which is used in filename. Not that it couldn't be "fixed" ... just saying how it currently is.
(In reply to comment #4) > Ok, but 3.8.2 is concrete answer for now. Yes, thanks David. > Currently not, the "label" is computed from "middle part" of build ID, which > is used in filename. Not that it couldn't be "fixed" ... just saying how it > currently is. Not a huge deal to me. If it was simple to put a space then I would want it. But not sure if there would be a simple automated way to insert a space in the right place.
Created attachment 227264 [details] outline of final steps to finish on Friday
I'm going to mark this as "fixed", since I've done all the work, except for "final steps", to make thing visible on Friday, which I've document in attachment (in case I get hit by a bus :) I even put in on my calendar and will be sure to set an alarm.
Thanks David, if you end up needing me to run the script manually I can do that. Just ping me when the time comes if you need me.
Just to document it, the recent build server crash (and, restore) "lost" the renamed build we were saving on build.eclipse.org to promote for equinox. It was not too hard to "restore" it myself, from the M20130204-1200 equinox drop on the download server (and, again rename, prepare for promotion, etc.) but ... highlights the danger of leaving important things on build machine. Thus, I opened bug 401602 to add similar "buildHidden" logic to Equinox's main DL page, so we put releases somewhere "safer", just hidden. No rush, but, next time someone is editing that page ... perhaps for build labels with spaces :) I didn't even think to look except in getting new builds to work noticed some of my recent changes on build machine were lost (likely overwritten by "restore", they were that recent) but more disturbing some old junk I had deleted while preparing the release magically re-appeared. So, I looked. And, sure enough, gone. But, all restored and ready to go ... if we ever get this release out the door. :/
