[WG: Sakai QA] Request for inclusion in 2.6.1: SAK-16416

[Michael Korcuska]

I think this is a good topic for the project planning meetings at the  
conference. One comment inline.
On Jun 5, 2009, at 17:37, Stephen Marquard wrote:

> I'm not convinced that the "selective component" approach to  
> maintenance releases is really useful. To me it adds a lot of  
> complexity, and means that the maintenance releases bear no  
> resemblance to the 2-6-x branches that people are running in  
> production. It's confusing when an issue is fixed in the maintenance  
> branch but not in a release which post-dates the fix.
>
> I would rather see the testing happen as and when issues are moved  
> into the 2-6-x branch, so that it's safe to release a 2.6.x from the  
> maintenance branch at any time.

I'm not sure this is realistic, actually. Some degree of testing is  
needed on the tag to make sure it is working. I'd be interested in  
opinions as to how little regression testing we can do to still have  
confidence that nothing has broken (or, rather, the risk is very small).

>
> The only exception to this IMO should be security releases, which  
> are strictly the last .x release plus the security fixes, so that  
> they can be done immediately.
>
> Also in general I think we'd be better off putting effort into  
> building more automated tests than trying to get a diffuse pool of  
> volunteers to do more regression testing to a release schedule.

Agreed, but efforts to this end have borne limited fruit thus far.

>
> Regards
> Stephen
>
>>>> Michael Korcuska <mkorcuska at sakaifoundation.org> 06/05/09 4:19 PM  
>>>> >>>
> I'm not going to get into the procedures (that's up to the QA group),
> but let me outline a few things we've discussed in the past:
>
> * QA is a (possible the most important) bounding factor on how many
> and which issues can going into a maintenance release. If we try to
> include everything that is fixed we create a large QA testing effort.
> Especially regression testing. This delays maintenance releases.  So
> there is an important balance between the number of things we include
> and the speed with which we get maintenance releases out the door. The
> more issues fixed, the longer it will take.
>
> * It is my view that a maintenance release that introduces regressions
> is a very bad thing. So they need to be well tested. Unfortunately the
> lack of unit test coverage (or automated testing of any kind) in the
> 2.x code base makes regression testing a manual process.
>
> * To reduce the surface area for testing we (the foundation) has
> adopted a strategy of targeting a limited number of components for
> maintenance releases. We test those few well and then cut a release.
> Hopefully we hop onto the next set of components and can cut a second
> maintenance release "soon" after.
>
> * Security issues change the schedule.  They need to happen quickly
> and so we may change our plans entirely based on the severity of the
> security issue and how close we are to cutting a release. And when one
> of these issues is involved it will now mean (usually) simultaneous
> releases on the 2.5 and 2.6 series (at least).
>
> Now we haven't been fully successful in executing this approach for a
> variety of reasons. And it is only a good idea to limit the components
> involved if, in fact, we can get maintenance releases out fairly
> quickly I'm expecting Pete P to get things moving more smoothly.  But
> right now the community is placing too much reliance on the
> Foundation. We simply need some help :-).
>
> Mostly this means help testing maintenance releases. Those who want to
> help test will certainly get a bigger voice in what issues/components
> are addressed first. Makes sense, yes?
>
> Another issue is the work involved in release management. It is
> increasingly the case that the work of release management has been
> taken up by Anthony.  We could really use some help with that. I'd
> love to have someone in the community start to manage the maintenance
> releases--usually the .0 release is the hardest and once things are
> set up, the maintenance release process is much less burdensome. Any
> volunteers to manage the upcoming maintenance releases for the 2.6 or
> 2.5 series?  Anthony will certainly guide you through the first one
> and be there to assist.....
>
> Best,
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sakai-qa mailing list
> sakai-qa at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-qa
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to sakai-qa-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org 
>  with a subject of "unsubscribe"

-- 
Michael Korcuska
Executive Director, Sakai Foundation
mkorcuska at sakaifoundation.org
phone: +1 510-931-6559
mobile (US): +1 510-599-2586
skype: mkorcuska