[Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

[Niels de Vos]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 07:51:47AM -0400, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
> On 10/25/2016 06:46 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Aravinda <avishwan at redhat.com
> > <mailto:avishwan at redhat.com>> wrote:
> > 
> >     Hi,
> > 
> >     Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need
> >     help from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug
> >     fixes to release Gluster 3.9.
> > 
> >     In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test
> >     day to accelerate the testing and release.
> > 
> >     Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We
> >     will prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before
>       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >     Test day.
> > 
> >     RC1 Link:
> >     http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/001442.html
> >     <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/001442.html>
> > 
> > 
> > I don't think testing RC1 would be ideal as 3.9 head has moved forward
> > with significant number of patches. I'd recommend of having an RC2 here.
> > 
> 
> BTW, please tag RC2 as 3.9.0rc2 (versus 3.9rc2).  It makes building
> packages for Fedora much easier.
> 
> I know you were following what was done for 3.8rcX. That was a pain. :-}

Can you explain what the problem is with 3.9rc2 and 3.9.0? The huge
advantage is that 3.9.0 is seen as a version update to 3.9rc2. When
3.9.0rc2 is used, 3.9.0 is *not* an update for that, and rc2 packages
will stay installed until 3.9.1 is released...

You can check this easily with the rpmdev-vercmp command:

   $ rpmdev-vercmp 3.9.0rc2 3.9.0
   3.9.0rc2 > 3.9.0
   $ rpmdev-vercmp 3.9rc2 3.9.0
   3.9rc2 < 3.9.0

So, at least for RPM packaging, 3.9rc2 is recommended, and 3.9.0rc2 is
problematic.

Thanks,
Niels


> 
> 3.7 and 3.6 were all 3.X.0betaY or 3.X.0qaY.
> 
> If for some reason 3.9 doesn't get released soon, I'll need to package
> the RC to get 3.9 into Fedora 25 before its GA and having a packaging
> friendly tag will make it that much easier for me to get that done.
> 
> (See the community packaging matrix I sent to the mailing lists and/or
> at
> http://gluster.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Install-Guide/Community_Packages/)
> 
> N.B. This will serve as the email part of the RC tagging discussion
> action item I have.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Kaleb
> _______________________________________________
> maintainers mailing list
> maintainers at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20161025/730772e0/attachment.sig>