[Geoserver-devel] Making Releases for Sibling Projects (e.g. GeoNode)

GeoServer GeoServer Developer
,
1

Dear All,
lately I have had a discussion with the GeoNode guys about making sure
they follow GeoServer releases more closely.

Right now the soon to be GeoNode 2.4 is depending on GS 2.7.x (stable)
which is fine since we get fixes coming in right away and we don't do
workaround in GN.
For 2.4 we would like to depend on a fixed release of GS but the
timing might not align with GS releases (i.e. beg September).

The proposal I made is to aling when possible with officiale (timed)
releases and to make GeoServer "intermediate" releases if really
needed (like we did for the security fix ).
I would not mark them with the name of the project that originated since:

-1- I would not want to pollute GS releases with downstream project
names, even if they are first class OS project
-2- Make people think that is something specific which they should not use

This applies to GeoNode, but not only. I can think of GeoNetwork and a
few other less widely known project.
Of course the resources for doing this will be provided by those
projects, no additional burden will be put on our (strong) shoulders.

Any feedback?

Regards,
Simone Giannecchini

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.

Ing. Simone Giannecchini
@simogeo
Founder/Director

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39 333 8128928

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

-------------------------------------------------------
AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate.
Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora
riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo
cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla
distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema.
Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte,
distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità
diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal
D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely
for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be
confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of
privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New
Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any
disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either
dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except
previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by
telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message
that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty
or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent
messages and accepts no responsibility for changes made after they
were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail
transmission, viruses, etc.

2

It would be great if GeoNode can follow GeoServer more closely. If you need to make an unscheduled release please just grab the next available version number (and update the release schedule to match).

So if you need a 2.7.x release in September it would be 2.7.3.

I would save the 2.7.2.1 for actual emergency patches.

Thanks for helping the GeoNode crew Simone. As far as I am concerned GeoServer release process is open and anyone can step forward and volunteer to make additional releases at any time[1] - our time boxed release schedule just makes things predictable. You can make a note in the release announcement when a release is made in conjunction with another project. As an example we had a recent GeoTools 14-M1 to assist the GeoMesa project.

···

On 31 July 2015 at 10:32, Simone Giannecchini <simone.giannecchini@anonymised.com> wrote:

Dear All,
lately I have had a discussion with the GeoNode guys about making sure
they follow GeoServer releases more closely.

Right now the soon to be GeoNode 2.4 is depending on GS 2.7.x (stable)
which is fine since we get fixes coming in right away and we don’t do
workaround in GN.
For 2.4 we would like to depend on a fixed release of GS but the
timing might not align with GS releases (i.e. beg September).

The proposal I made is to aling when possible with officiale (timed)
releases and to make GeoServer “intermediate” releases if really
needed (like we did for the security fix ).
I would not mark them with the name of the project that originated since:

-1- I would not want to pollute GS releases with downstream project
names, even if they are first class OS project
-2- Make people think that is something specific which they should not use

This applies to GeoNode, but not only. I can think of GeoNetwork and a
few other less widely known project.
Of course the resources for doing this will be provided by those
projects, no additional burden will be put on our (strong) shoulders.

Any feedback?

Regards,
Simone Giannecchini

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.

Ing. Simone Giannecchini
@simogeo
Founder/Director

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39 333 8128928

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate.
Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora
riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo
cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla
distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema.
Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte,
distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità
diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal
D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely
for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be
confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of
privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy’s New
Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any
disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either
dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except
previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by
telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message
that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty
or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent
messages and accepts no responsibility for changes made after they
were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail
transmission, viruses, etc.

Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@anonymised.comsts.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

–
Jody Garnett

3

On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com>
wrote:

It would be great if GeoNode can follow GeoServer more closely. If you
need to make an unscheduled release please just grab the next available
version number (and update the release schedule
<https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/Release-Schedule&gt; to match).

So if you need a 2.7.x release in September it would be 2.7.3.

I would save the 2.7.2.1 for actual emergency patches.

Thanks for helping the GeoNode crew Simone. As far as I am concerned
GeoServer release process is open and anyone can step forward and volunteer
to make additional releases at any time[1] - our time boxed release
schedule just makes things predictable. You can make a note in the release
announcement when a release is made in conjunction with another project.
As an example we had a recent GeoTools 14-M1 to assist the GeoMesa project.

Hi Jody,
trying to understand your proposal, which at a firs read looks like it
would break time boxing and predictability.

Examples: if GeoNode rolls a 2.7.3 release in September, whatever date,
will we still release a 2.7.4 in October (when 2.7.3 was actually scheduled
for)?
What if a sibling project needs a release 15 days before the official
relase date (say GeoNode's 2.7.3 would be at the end of September), would we
still release the regular release 15 days later? Maybe with just one or two
changes (not entirely unlikely on a maintenace series, which is what
2.7.x will become September 18th when 2.8.0 becomes the new stable?)

Cheers
Andrea

--

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39 339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

*AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003*

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.

-------------------------------------------------------

4

Hi Jody,
trying to understand your proposal, which at a firs read looks like it
would break time boxing and predictability.

Should remain predictable.

Examples: if GeoNode rolls a 2.7.3 release in September, whatever date,

will we still release a 2.7.4 in October (when 2.7.3 was actually scheduled
for)?

Correct. The release dates are fixed, if a "bonus" release shows up due to
a volunteer having need so be it.

I would reserve a patch release for when a previous release is used as the
starting point for a branch (as was done for recent security releases).

What if a sibling project needs a release 15 days before the official

relase date (say GeoNode's 2.7.3 would be at the end of September), would we
still release the regular release 15 days later? Maybe with just one or
two changes (not entirely unlikely on a maintenace series, which is what
2.7.x will become September 18th when 2.8.0 becomes the new stable?)

That is correct. Release date is predictable (in part because we have made
this time boxed commitment). This does not preclude volunteers from
stepping up to make additional releases.

Indeed I would much rather see "downstream" projects make a versioned
GeoTools release than latch on to a specific snapshot revision.
--
Jody

5

I will update the release schedule with this in mind.

···

On 3 August 2015 at 20:39, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com> wrote:

–
Jody Garnett

Should remain predictable.

Correct. The release dates are fixed, if a “bonus” release shows up due to a volunteer having need so be it.

I would reserve a patch release for when a previous release is used as the starting point for a branch (as was done for recent security releases).

That is correct. Release date is predictable (in part because we have made this time boxed commitment). This does not preclude volunteers from stepping up to make additional releases.

Indeed I would much rather see “downstream” projects make a versioned GeoTools release than latch on to a specific snapshot revision.

Jody

Hi Jody,
trying to understand your proposal, which at a firs read looks like it would break time boxing and predictability.

Examples: if GeoNode rolls a 2.7.3 release in September, whatever date, will we still release a 2.7.4 in October (when 2.7.3 was actually scheduled for)?

What if a sibling project needs a release 15 days before the official relase date (say GeoNode’s 2.7.3 would be at the end of September), would we
still release the regular release 15 days later? Maybe with just one or two changes (not entirely unlikely on a maintenace series, which is what
2.7.x will become September 18th when 2.8.0 becomes the new stable?)