Preperation for Samba 4.0 beta1!

[Michael Adam]

Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 11:44 -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> > 
> > In case I'm being too much of a dick here (sorry), I just want
> > to say if you want to call it the final alpha I have no objections
> > to releasing tomorrow.
> > 
> > I just want a beta to actually *mean* something.
> 
> I've looked back, and I agree, I've normally given over a weeks notice
> in the past, which has usually stretched to month by the time the lever
> is pulled. 
> 
> In this case, we have been talking about what should be in the beta for
> over a month now, and had discussed it in terms of 'once the ACL patches
> are in and s3fs is the default' for quite some time.  We have also been
> talking about what the beta means - and that it is the transition to
> s3fs as the default.  These conditions are now met.

It is right that we have been talking about doing the beta more
concretely now. But indeed the concrete day was short notice.
And yes, we had agreed to release it under the process as the
alphas. It was in fact me who had proposed to release the Beta
in May (or early June). But give the current discussion, we
should not force the Beta today. If Andrew offers to cut another
(final!) alpha today, that is great. For the Beta, we should
still go for a close date. Let's get more specific. (It also gives
our users the chance to get more excited about the dooming beta.  ;-)

Proposal 1: We could aim for releasing Beta on May 31 (Thursday).

Proposal 2: If this is inconvenient for some reason, I propose a
date the week after that (since I'll be busy on Friday June 1),
say June 4 (Tuesday).

Of course the date is rough, since we didn't branch yet, so
there is autobuild to overcome for each push.

Opinions?

I guess if Andrew's time is shorter starting next week, we will find a
way for someone to help technically.

Cheers - Michael

> That said, despite it being just the first beta (we also changed from TP
> to alpha for similarly small reasons), and that I thought we had agreed
> to release is under the same process as alpha releases, clearly folks
> are uncomfortable with the current state of the tree.  
> 
> I'll cut an alpha as proposed today, and a beta a proposed by Micheal -
> time and objections permitting, by or soon after the end of the month.
> (This provides the one week notice requested). 
> 
> Hopefully once we start making beta releases we will realise that they
> are not magical, just a way of getting more users a chance to see the
> great software we all so passionately work on. 
> 
> Andrew Bartlett
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
> Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 206 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20120525/7ca06c50/attachment.pgp>