Re: [Release-team] Deadline for Feb release, and some thoughts about the release process
Sounds good, thanks! On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:25 AM, Brettin, Thomas S. <[email protected]>wrote:
sure.
Miriam should have something for me to look at this am based on our conversation yesterday. From that, I'll derive some phrasing that is consistent.
say -- by cob today?
t
On Jan 22, 2014, at 8:22 AM, Adam Arkin <[email protected]> wrote:
right... so can you suggest a phrasing for the request for information? I want people to have a sense of urgency but also be realistic both for their final development and evaluation of the deploy process. I also agree it would be good to ensure we get those release notes early... A
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:20 AM, Brettin, Thomas S. <[email protected]>wrote:
That would be good.
We need to remember that the timeline is highly influenced by how long it takes to get a module through the test environment and into production. On average, it's a couple days. Some go in 5 mins, others require multiple days because the deployment or testing fails.
Also, Dan and Shane are really our only guys deploying onto produciton hardware.
On Jan 22, 2014, at 6:07 AM, Adam Arkin <[email protected]> wrote:
We probably need to do a diagnosis of where people are asap...
Figure out where the final set of tasks oadblocks are-- it would allow us to strategize the timeline better maybe? A
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:55 AM, Brettin, Thomas S. <[email protected]
wrote:
I had a 30 min phone discussion with Miriam on this topic. She is planning to send more detailed process today
What is new is that a developer needs to submit a contingency plan if the module isn't going to make it into production (Miriam will send dates/timeline today).
The conteingency plan needs to outline those special items that that is needed so a dev can run his/her code in a development environment. These include firewall modifications, urls, connections to other services, what ever is needed.
If no contingency plan is submitted, then they are basically on their own.
Tom
On Jan 21, 2014, at 11:34 PM, Nomi Harris <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear release team (particularly Miriam, Dan, Shane, and Tom),
Michael Sneddon and I were talking today about the release process and what we need to do as we rapidly approach the February demos. The January release has not been completed; meanwhile, some developers want a release closer to the Feb cutoff as they are still fixing bugs. (I would hope that they are not adding new features at this point, though I'm pretty sure some are.)
Miriam and the deploy team will obviously need to set a cutoff date for (re)deploying services, since I doubt they are planning to stay up all night the night before the DOE meeting trying to check and deploy a whole bunch of services. So, what are those dates? We probably need to reveal them to the developers or else they will assume that they can make changes until the 11th hour and get them into production for the demos.
Also, Michael and I talked about release notes and how critical they are as an information source both internally and externally. We all know their importance to external users (who need to know what's changed in this release), but release notes also serve a valuable role in informing the release team about why the service needs to be (re)deployed. Is there significant new functionality, and if so, what? Are there major bug fixes? Are there changes that might affect other services upstream or downstream? There are other ways in which developers might communicate this info to the release team, but why not put it in the release notes and kill two birds with one stone?
We also talked about the fact that some services have been tested and deployed and are now ready for public release EXCEPT they lack updated release notes. This is not the most efficient way to go about the release. We propose that instead of being checked last, the release notes should be sent to the release team at the time a service owner requests a release. If they don't send release notes, then their service doesn't enter the deploy pipeline until they do. Once they've sent release notes, the release team can make an informed decision about how to prioritize the release. (For example, if the release team gets a request on Feb 8 at midnight for a new release because the service has a new improved error message, they might decide that it's not worth doing a frantic last-minute redeploy of the only-slightly-changed service.)
We propose the following text to be sent to developers ASAP. The only thing that needs to be filled in is the drop-dead date for requesting a release before the Feb demos.
-------- The major Jan deployment/release is coming to a close. As we move towards the February demos/release, the release team is transitioning to a rolling deployment process. Instead of a single build week, production deployments will be scheduled when a service owner requests a redeploy and has met the requirements (e.g., updated release notes and tests).
The FINAL date you can request a release to be sure it will be available for the February presentations is [DATE]
To request a release, send an email to Miriam ([email protected]) and the release team ([email protected]) that includes: 1) name of service and/or repository to release (and the branch, if other than main) 2) updated release notes (as a git URL or attachment) documenting the major changes in this release (which will also tell the release team about the reason for the deployment). As always, your release notes should follow this format: https://trac.kbase.us/projects/kbase/wiki/ReleaseNotesStyle
The release team will review the release notes to help prioritize the deployment effort and ensure that developers of dependent modules are notified; then we will proceed with deployment to production as quickly as possible. ----------
Nomi and Michael _______________________________________________ Release-team mailing list [email protected] https://lists.kbase.us/mailman/listinfo/release-team
-- Adam Paul Arkin Dean A. Richard Newton Memorial Chair ------------------------------------- Director, Physical Biosciences Division E.O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Professor, Department of Bioengineering University of California Berkeley, CA, 94720
CEO/CSO, DOE Systems Biology Knowledgebase, http://kbase.us Director, Berkeley Synthetic Biology Institute, http://synbio.berkeley.edu PI and Co-Director, ENIGMA SFA, http://enigma.lbl.gov<http://vimss.lbl.gov/> Investigator, Energy Biosciences Institute, http://energybiosciencesinstitute.org
Office: 512C Energy Biosciences Building (Berkeley Campus) Mailing address: E.O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road, MS 955-512L Berkeley, CA 94720
Contact: W: http://genomics.lbl.gov V: 510-495-2366 C: 510-206-1389 F: 510-486-6219
Assistant: Gwyneth A. Terry V: 510-495-2116 E: [email protected] -------------------------------------
-- Adam Paul Arkin Dean A. Richard Newton Memorial Chair ------------------------------------- Director, Physical Biosciences Division E.O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Professor, Department of Bioengineering University of California Berkeley, CA, 94720
CEO/CSO, DOE Systems Biology Knowledgebase, http://kbase.us Director, Berkeley Synthetic Biology Institute, http://synbio.berkeley.edu PI and Co-Director, ENIGMA SFA, http://enigma.lbl.gov<http://vimss.lbl.gov/> Investigator, Energy Biosciences Institute, http://energybiosciencesinstitute.org
Office: 512C Energy Biosciences Building (Berkeley Campus) Mailing address: E.O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road, MS 955-512L Berkeley, CA 94720
Contact: W: http://genomics.lbl.gov V: 510-495-2366 C: 510-206-1389 F: 510-486-6219
Assistant: Gwyneth A. Terry V: 510-495-2116 E: [email protected] -------------------------------------
-- Adam Paul Arkin Dean A. Richard Newton Memorial Chair ------------------------------------- Director, Physical Biosciences Division E.O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Professor, Department of Bioengineering University of California Berkeley, CA, 94720 CEO/CSO, DOE Systems Biology Knowledgebase, http://kbase.us Director, Berkeley Synthetic Biology Institute, http://synbio.berkeley.edu PI and Co-Director, ENIGMA SFA, http://enigma.lbl.gov <http://vimss.lbl.gov> Investigator, Energy Biosciences Institute, http://energybiosciencesinstitute.org Office: 512C Energy Biosciences Building (Berkeley Campus) Mailing address: E.O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road, MS 955-512L Berkeley, CA 94720 Contact: W: http://genomics.lbl.gov V: 510-495-2366 C: 510-206-1389 F: 510-486-6219 Assistant: Gwyneth A. Terry V: 510-495-2116 E: [email protected] -------------------------------------
participants (1)
-
Adam Arkin