On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:01 AM, Vijay Bellur <vbellur@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi All, > > We are blocked on 3.7.12 owing to this proposal. Appreciate any > feedback on this! > > Thanks, > Vijay > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Vijay Bellur <vbellur@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> We have encountered a spate of regressions in recent 3.7.x releases. The >> 3.7.x maintainers are facing additional burdens to ensure functional, >> performance and upgrade correctness. I feel component maintainers should own >> these aspects of stability as we own the components and understand our >> components better than anybody else. In order to have more active >> participation from maintainers for every release going forward, I propose >> this process: >> >> 1. All component maintainers will need to provide an explicit ack about the >> content and quality of their respective components before a release is >> tagged. >> >> 2. A release will not be tagged if any component is not acked by a >> maintainer. >> >> 3. Release managers will co-ordinate getting acks from maintainers and >> perform necessary housekeeping (closing bugs etc.). >> >> This is not entirely new and a part of this process has been outlined in the >> Guidelines for Maintainers [1] document. I am inclined to enforce this >> process with more vigor to ensure that we do better on quality & stability. >> >> Thoughts, questions and feedback about the process are very welcome! >> +1 from me. Spreading out the verification duties will help us do better releases. >> Thanks, >> Vijay >> >> [1] >> http://www.gluster.org/community/documentation/index.php/Guidelines_For_Maintainers >> >> > _______________________________________________ > maintainers mailing list > maintainers@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
