Release process changes

Anything related to PR, release planning and any other non-technical idea how to move the project forward should be discussed here.
MetaCthulhu
Posts: 27
Joined: 10 Apr 2015, 23:29

Re: Release process changes

Post by MetaCthulhu » 06 Sep 2016, 03:06

If you do go with option 2, would the hidden section ever be displayed? Like, after a release would the dev forum for that release be displayed? I know this sounds silly, but I really like reading all the technical information and seeing all the internal communications that go on. You guys have work to do, and I don't want to get in the way of that, but I'd be disappointed if everything stayed behind closed doors forever.

But I'm not a dev, tester, publicity guy, or project leader; I'm just a guy who lurks a lot, and maybe listening to me isn't in your best interest. :?

User avatar
raevol
Posts: 3076
Joined: 07 Aug 2011, 01:12
Location: Caldera

Re: Release process changes

Post by raevol » 06 Sep 2016, 05:38

Honestly the only thing we need to keep "secret" is the links to the youtube videos, changelog, RC packages, and if possible (poor psi29a!) keep the PPAs from updating before we are ready. All the discussion could be public, it's just those things that need to be kept under wraps.

To be clear, I don't want to "hide" things from the public because we are afraid of a "leak". This is open source software, it's not like we lose money if our stuff gets released. The only think I am trying to avoid is all the miscommuncation- people seeing the packages available for download or update, then coming to the forums and seeing the video links, and then because they don't read the rest of the thread, wondering why we haven't publicly announced the release. It's just a miscommunication issue that I would like to fix.

EDIT: I mean there's more than that as far as what needs to be fixed in our release process... but that's what needs to be fixed as far as hiding things from the public.

User avatar
lysol
Posts: 1424
Joined: 26 Mar 2013, 01:48
Location: Sweden

Re: Release process changes

Post by lysol » 06 Sep 2016, 08:32

raevol wrote:Honestly the only thing we need to keep "secret" is the links to the youtube videos, changelog, RC packages, and if possible (poor psi29a!) keep the PPAs from updating before we are ready. All the discussion could be public, it's just those things that need to be kept under wraps.
That's true really. Zini's "OpenMW 0.41" thread does not have to be hidden at all. He can do it the usual way. It's just the videos and the RC's that need the hidden forums.

So here's a revised list of the one I did earlier:

The public "Organisation and Planning" forum:
  • Zini's release thread
Hidden release forum:
  • Windows RC thread
  • OSX RC thread
  • Linux tar RC (+ apt?) thread
  • Video thread
Normal mapped texture replacers, exclusive for OpenMW:
My Nexus page

User avatar
psi29a
Posts: 4851
Joined: 29 Sep 2011, 10:13
Location: Belgium
Gitlab profile: https://gitlab.com/psi29a/
Contact:

Re: Release process changes

Post by psi29a » 06 Sep 2016, 08:51

Canonical's PPA supports "Private PPA" but it isn't automatic. I had to send an email and I'm waiting for a reply.

Essentially, you have to have access rights to the PPA which is managed by the admins of the OpenMW group for example. For there I'm not sure of the details, but the idea is that it would be a 'staging area', and when we are ready for a drop, someone copies the working packages from staging over to our public PPA.

Also... I've enabled support for ARM packages so that our brothers on ARM based systems (Raspberry Pi) can also use the PPA. We will now support the following:
AMD x86-64 (amd64)
ARM ARMv8 (arm64)
ARM ARMv7 Soft Float (armel)
ARM ARMv7 Hard Float (armhf)
Intel x86 (i386)

User avatar
Atahualpa
Posts: 1127
Joined: 09 Feb 2016, 20:03

Re: Release process changes

Post by Atahualpa » 06 Sep 2016, 09:01

@lysol: Three things to add.

1. For the sake of completeness: The hidden forums would also include other internal discussion. E.g., I would like to move my FAQ videos thread there.
2. We'd also have to hide raevol's change log because it contains the video links. (Yes, we could omit them until the release is ready but I don't consider this very elegant.)
3. With (2): We need a general release status thread.

->

Team forums
  • <read first>
  • <general announcements>
  • Release forums
    • Release status thread
    • Windows RC thread
    • OSX RC thread
    • Linux tar RC (+ apt?) thread
    • Video thread
  • Public Relations forums
    • FAQ videos thread
    • Making fun of regular users thread
    • Commercialising OpenMW thread
    • ...

User avatar
raevol
Posts: 3076
Joined: 07 Aug 2011, 01:12
Location: Caldera

Re: Release process changes

Post by raevol » 06 Sep 2016, 09:41

psi29a wrote:Essentially, you have to have access rights to the PPA which is managed by the admins of the OpenMW group for example. For there I'm not sure of the details, but the idea is that it would be a 'staging area', and when we are ready for a drop, someone copies the working packages from staging over to our public PPA.
I don't want to throw extra work on you, but if you're willing to deal with it, it'd be amazing... :shock:

User avatar
sjek
Posts: 437
Joined: 22 Nov 2014, 10:51

Re: Release process changes

Post by sjek » 06 Sep 2016, 09:43

would it be possible to use link / file hiding properties like in other forums ?
"life is crazy"
"craziness has beauty which only crazies understand" some movie clip in the head.
https://wiki.openmw.org/index.php?title=Testing

User avatar
lgromanowski
Site Admin
Posts: 1193
Joined: 05 Aug 2011, 22:21
Location: Wroclaw, Poland
Contact:

Re: Release process changes

Post by lgromanowski » 06 Sep 2016, 09:43

For PR related thing we could reuse "Dark penguins of chaos squad" group and sub-forum created by SirHerrbatka, create "release forums" and than add people from "Dark penguins" group + related to release management.
best regards,
Lukasz

User avatar
psi29a
Posts: 4851
Joined: 29 Sep 2011, 10:13
Location: Belgium
Gitlab profile: https://gitlab.com/psi29a/
Contact:

Re: Release process changes

Post by psi29a » 06 Sep 2016, 09:59

I think this is for the best, better signal to noise ratio between developers, packagers and release managers. For release and other "internal kitchen" stuff, this is a OK way of handling it.

darkbasic
Posts: 99
Joined: 18 Apr 2016, 15:45
Contact:

Re: Release process changes

Post by darkbasic » 06 Sep 2016, 12:11

lysol wrote:
raevol wrote:Honestly the only thing we need to keep "secret" is the links to the youtube videos, changelog, RC packages, and if possible (poor psi29a!) keep the PPAs from updating before we are ready. All the discussion could be public, it's just those things that need to be kept under wraps.
That's true really. Zini's "OpenMW 0.41" thread does not have to be hidden at all. He can do it the usual way. It's just the videos and the RC's that need the hidden forums.
Agree on the release videos, but I don't agree on changelogs and RC packages. This is a FOSS project, everyone has access to the git repo and everyone can pull rc tags. Testing should be encouraged: hiding discussions in private areas you are simply going to kill interest from outsiders. If they are not going to be interested they will never join the private areas and the project will slowly starve. Do it in public, raise interest, encourage testing, just strip the youtube links and avoid publishing packages on PPAs before you're ready. Also final version on git shouldn't be tagged until you're *really* ready to release. In the meantime branch it, tag RCs and test RCs: you can't blame a package maintainer for updating his package because he got an automatic notification that a new stable release has been tagged.

Post Reply