LTS release proposal for q4 2018 and q1 2019 #390
Comments
|
Does anyone have thoughts about this schedule. Would people be able to volunteer taking responsibility for these specific releases? That would include getting backports up to date and cutting the release / rc's. Happy to mentor anyone interested in helping out |
MylesBorins
changed the title
|
I'll volunteer for v8.13.1, happy to help out with 10.x in Q1 too - maybe we could rotate between releasers when it is just 10.x? |
|
@targos do you want to include current releases here too? |
|
@MylesBorins I think we can open another issue for current releases? /cc @BridgeAR |
|
Looks good to me. It seems like the aim is for roughly monthly releases but aligned to Tuesdays, I like that. How about for releaser scheduling we just keep 1 release ahead, so we always know who's doing next. If @BethGriggs, you do the next v8, @codebytere I think might like to do the next v10, then we're 👌. After those releases let's make sure we slot someone in for the next v10. It looks like @BethGriggs is now on the releaser list. @codebytere do you wanting to move to full releaser status or would you prefer to just do prep? IMO it might be best for new releasers to do a Current or two before doing an LTS so we're not springing fresh GPG keys on users in LTS. @nodejs/release any thoughts on that as a policy? Does it matter? |
|
@codebytere has already been nominated and approved for the release team 🎉
Since they have been working on backports for a couple months now I was
imagining they could work on preparing the release and I could sign /
promote while they Shadow me
They could then promote / sign the following release
Thoughts?
…On Tue, Nov 20, 2018, 9:50 PM Rod Vagg ***@***.*** wrote:
Looks good to me. It seems like the aim is for roughly monthly releases
but aligned to Tuesdays, I like that.
How about for releaser scheduling we just keep 1 release ahead, so we
always know who's doing next. If @BethGriggs
<https://github.com/BethGriggs>, you do the next v8, @codebytere
<https://github.com/codebytere> I think might like to do the next v10,
then we're 👌. After those releases let's make sure we slot someone in
for the next v10.
It looks like @BethGriggs <https://github.com/BethGriggs> is now on the
releaser list. @codebytere <https://github.com/codebytere> do you wanting
to move to full releaser status or would you prefer to just do prep?
IMO it might be best for new releasers to do a Current or two before doing
an LTS so we're not springing fresh GPG keys on users in LTS.
@nodejs/release <https://github.com/orgs/nodejs/teams/release> any
thoughts on that as a policy? Does it matter?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#390 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAecV_r-91v2pJNxFSgR96uhEJ6Bbb0nks5uxL91gaJpZM4Ypcc_>
.
|
|
Sounds good, so that'll be 10.13.1. I'd still love to see a Current release signed with a new key before LTS but if the next 10 has your key then we have at least until the 10 after that to have a Current in between if we agree that's the way to go (I'm happy to hear objections as this as a policy). @codebytere would you like to tackle a Current sometime in the next month or two? We could then assign 10.13.2 as yours, under your key. @targos I think you should go ahead and open a new issue for discussion about Current. It'd be good to see that surfaced here. I know you have conversations elsewhere about who does which release so visibility into that would be great. |
|
Seems reasonable to get a current release out with the key first as a way to test it out. Should we open a PR to document this as part of the on boarding process?
… On Nov 20, 2018, at 10:07 PM, Rod Vagg ***@***.***> wrote:
Sounds good, so that'll be 10.13.1. I'd still love to see a Current release signed with a new key before LTS but if the next 10 has your key then we have at least until the 10 after that to have a Current in between if we agree that's the way to go (I'm happy to hear objections as this as a policy).
@codebytere <https://github.com/codebytere> would you like to tackle a Current sometime in the next month or two? We could then assign 10.13.2 as yours, under your key.
@targos <https://github.com/targos> I think you should go ahead and open a new issue for discussion about Current. It'd be good to see that surfaced here. I know you have conversations elsewhere about who does which release so visibility into that would be great.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#390 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAecV5VUK6Ug35H2pWA5UEvQhyeiWRU1ks5uxMOHgaJpZM4Ypcc_>.
|
|
Proposed @ #393 Also noticed while doing this that:
Oops, so we should have got @BethGriggs' key onto README 2 weeks ago. @codebytere: since you're already approved, you should get yours onto nodejs/node/README.md too and do the bit about informing the Docker team about your GPG key as well if you haven't already so they can get their scripts updated ahead of time. |
Myles signed the 8.13.0 release: nodejs/node#24532 (comment) |
|
@rvagg the way we have been doing it is waiting until they are onboarded to add the keys. As mentioned by richard above I signed the 8.13.0 release. Will review your PR |
|
I've updated the release post including info on each person who has volunteered for the release Closing this issue. We can figure out who is going to do the q1 2019 releases somewhere else |
Q4 2018 Carbon (8.x) Release Schedule
At the end of Q4 8.x moves to maintenance mode
Q4 2018 Dubnium (10.x) Release Schedule
Q1 2019 Dubnium (10.x) Release Schedule
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: