[Box Backup-dev] Towards 0.11 - release candidates?

[Stuart Hickinbottom]

OK - I'll knock up a draft on the wiki and post back when I've done that 
- we'll just need to fill in the gaps when the candidate is available.

Stuart

Chris Wilson wrote:
> Hi Stuart,
>
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007, Stuart Hickinbottom wrote:
>
>> As it seems we're moving towards a 0.11 release (a terrific 
>> achievement which will be especially welcomed by those with Win32 
>> clients, I expect), I was wondering about the path that's going to take.
>
> Thanks for thinking about this and posting your thought and a plan :-) 
> Perhaps we should write this up on the wiki so that we can remember, 
> use and update it in future releases?
>
>> I know a lot of testing has been going on with specific svn versions, 
>> but that's not a particularly clear baseline. Will we tag a specific 
>> version as a release candidate in Subversion and then ask people to 
>> test that as a candidate for release? That tagged version could be 
>> pulled in by folks who compile their own versions, and compiled Win32 
>> packages of that version could be there for the Win32 folks to test.
>
> That seems like a very sensible way to proceed.
>
>> Also, people will need advice for upgrading their current 
>> installations to 0.11 (not recommended until 0.11 comes out, I'm 
>> sure, but it would good to also test that migration approach if 
>> possible) - I've seen information floating by on new logging options 
>> which would be pertinent, and how people upgrade their current 
>> Windows service installation, too.
>
> New logging options are useful but not required. The protocol is the 
> same, so it shouldn't require the store to be updated at the same time 
> as the clients, or even fix the order of updating them.
>
> Windows services will have to be reinstalled (remove using the old 
> bbackupquery, install using the new one).
>
> People might want to either regenerate their configs, or look at the 
> difference between a fresh config and their current one, to enable 
> some useful options like KeepAliveTime which are now on by default, 
> and to think about enabling StoreObjectInfoFile.
>
> Most syslog messages have changed their format, so any scripts which 
> parse syslog will have to be updated.
>
> Anyone using SINGLEPROCESS in anger (e.g. to run bbstored as a managed 
> service under daemontools or similar) should shoot themselves quietly 
> in the foot and prepare to change it to "-F" after the upgrade. (this 
> was never a documented option, and now behaves a little differently).
>
>> Finally (sorry - this seems to be developing into a ramble), what 
>> about defects found during that period? Are they to be encouraged to 
>> get a Trac account so they can raise tickets, or post here and then 
>> they'll be transferred to tickets if they're definite problems?
>
> I think we should continue to do what we're doing now: triage on the 
> mailing list and file bug reports against 0.11rc1 in Trac. If the 
> volume of bug reports goes up massively then I'll reconsider.
>
>> I'm away for the next few days, but I could probably start something 
>> off on the wiki if it would help, but I'd need some information on 
>> the approach to kickstart that.
>
> Hope this helps, if you need any more info then please ask.
>
> Cheers, Chris.