On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 09:29 -0700, Michael Halstead wrote:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 4:58 AM Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@...> wrote:
Hi All,
There are a few different discussions I'd like to pull together and talk about some QA and release process changes.
Firstly, we've just made some changes to the docs build process. This is now deriving the version information from the git tags in the docs repository. This means as long as the tags are present, the versioned docs should appear correctly on the website.
This means changes to the release process but they should be simplifications and make things easier and simpler for everyone involved. Simply tagging a point release should enable all the right things to happen. A new release series should just need changes to set_versions.py in master and then the correct things should also "just happen". If there are any questions or issues let me know.
The second thing we've been discussing is streamlining the release process where it makes sense to, particularly around point releases. Since we started the current processes the autobuilder has massively improved in test coverage and we'd like to be more dynamic with point releases.
Experience tells us that the majority of blocking issues in a point release are found on the autobuilder and that if the autobuilder build is green, the release is likely going to go ahead. The "real hardware" testing QA does is extremely valuable and important but in general hasn't been finding issues that block releases.
As such we'd propose that for point releases:
* we proceed to release after builds pass as green on the autobuilder or only show well known intermittent failures. * 'real hardware' QA takes place alongside that release process * the test results of that extra QA are merged into the release artefacts later as additional test results
Right now we tag the test results in yocto-testresults-contrib on release day. In the future we will release right away then when the full test results are available tag them and update the RELEASENOTES. Is that correct?
I'm not sure we need to tag that repository, I think it was mainly there to allow transfer of the results over to the release artefacts?
