Skip to main content

Notice: This Wiki is now read only and edits are no longer possible. Please see: for the plan.

Jump to: navigation, search

TM/3.4 Ramp down Plan

< TM

Project Plan

This plan is about the detailed timing and planning of the last release candidates for Target Management 3.4 (TM 3.4 Project Plan).

For reference, see the Juno/Simultaneous Release Plan, in particular the Juno/Simultaneous Release Plan#Milestones and Release Candidates.

When talking about API Freeze, we always mean public API only. Provisional, experimental "internal" API, as well as incubating components are exempt from API freeze or feature freeze, although we will strive for release quality of these components as well.

Ramp down for Juno

Typically the last week of a Milestone is for testing, and fixing only regressions and P1 or blocking defects. For milestones, the component lead (or delegate) is enough to review and approve a bug.

For M6, we plan to be API complete, so there will not be any more breaking API changes or unsolicited API change requests accepted.

For M7, we plan to be functionally complete. We will accept API changes only if regressions are involved, or serious issues need to be addressed. Only non-breaking API changes are accepted, and require review by the component lead and one additional committer. After M7, the remaining Release Candidates are (only) for fixing bugs, or fixing release required items (such as version numbers, licensing, etc.).

After M7, production of release candidates starts. Additional RCs will be produced every week. After the first RC is produced, the time for general functional improvements is long past. The following describes the types of bugs that would be appropriate:

  • A regression
  • A P1 or P2 bug, one that is blocking or critical, and some cases of major severities.
  • Documentation and PII files are exceptions to the normal PMC required review, since there is little chance of that breaking anything, though it is still expected to be complete by M6, and remaining work to be only documentation fixes (that is, no refactoring of plugins, build changes, etc, without PMC review and approval).
  • In addition to a bug meeting the above priority/severity conditions, there should be a simple, safe, well understood fix that is well isolated from effecting other components, that doesn't affect API or adopters, that has been well reviewed and well tested.
  • As each Release Candidate passes, the criteria for weighing the benefit-to-risk ratio criteria gets higher and higher, and as such requires a larger number of committers and PMC members to review.

TM 3.4 Dates

  • May 7th, M7 produced
After M7, API changes or functional enhancements should no longer happen. If there is a need for an API change or functional change, it requires a majority of committers to vote +1 on the mailing list or bugzilla bug. For plain bugfixes, review is optional although it is encouraged for any bug beyond real simple changes. Bug fixes that could potentially affect other components or adopters require project lead review. All checkins except simple [cleanup] should be associated with a corresponding bugzilla item.
  • May 21st, RC1 produced
After RC1, all checkins must be associated with a bugzilla item describing the change - even simple cleanups must be described and linked with the checkin comment through a [123456] bug number. Besides the fix author, at least 1 additional committer must also review and vote +1 on bugzilla for each change, although the review may also happen after-the-fact to ensure smooth operation: fixes can be committed provided that the review and voting happens afterwards.
  • May 28th, RC2 produced
After RC2, at least 1 additional committer must review and approve each patch on bugzilla before it can be committed. Approvals after the fact can only happen in case of a must-fix-emergency where no reviewer is reachable in time.
  • June 4th, RC3 produced
After RC3, at least 2 additional committers must agree in a vote after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk before it can be committed.
  • June 11th, RC4 produced
After RC4, all available committers must also review and agree in a vote after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk before it can be committed.

Ramp down for Juno SR1 (tentatively Sep 28, 2012)

Since we expect to see only bug fixes without functional change in the TM 3.4.1 Service Release, the testing and ramp down procedure is shortened compared to the full release. Because of that, we will also not have milestones for the Service Release, but produce weekly I-builds or M-builds every Thursday. Quality of these builds is expected to be the same or better than any milestone. This also means that checkins into the TM 3.4.1 maintenance branch typically need to be reviewed by at least one additional committer, unless the fix is very small and well understood or only affects documentation.

The last few weeks before the TM 3.4.1 release are reserved for testing and raising the bar for bug fixes, with appropriateness of a bug fix considered similar to the full release described above.

  • Aug 20, 2012 RC1 (3.4.1 freeze and branching)
After RC1, we'll have an intensive TM 3.4.1 Testing pass. For futher fixes, besides the normal component team review, at least 1 additional committer should also review and vote +1 on bugzilla after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk. Every fix after RC1 needs to be verified. With RC1, we will fork off the R3_3_maintenance branch for further 3.4.1 work. Fixes after RC1 need to be applied to both the MAIN trunk and the R3_4_maintenance branch.
  • Sep 3, 2012 RC2 produced
After RC2, besides the normal component team review, at least 1 additional committer must also review and vote +1 on bugzilla after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk.
  • Sep 10, 2012 RC3 produced
After RC3, we do not really want to put any more bug fixes into 3.4.1 unless an emergency turns up. Now, besides the normal component team review, project leadership and 1 additional committer must also review and vote +1 after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk. Escalation with the Tools PMC is also recommended.
  • Sep 17, 2012 final bits available
Release will be declared with Juno on Sep 28

Ramp down for Juno SR2 (tentatively Feb 22, 2013)

We do not plan any more work except critical bug fixes on the maintenance branch. We expect the master branch to be used for maintenance up to SR2 GA at which point we will create a branch for R3_4_maintenance. The R3_4_maintenance branch will be used for post SR2 fixes that must go into the 3.4 stream.

Every fix must be reviewed by project leadership if available, and 1 additional committer up until RC3. After RC3 2 committers will be required to approve a change. No changes will be accepted after RC4 unless required to fix aggregation build issues.

  • Feb 10, 2013 final bits available (RC4)
Release will be declared with Juno SR2 on Feb 22

Back to the top