[Releasing] Meeting minutes: release team meeting 05.12.2012

Tanilkan Sinan Sinan.Tanilkan at digia.com
Wed Dec 5 19:17:26 CET 2012


Thank you for the meeting today. Here are the minutes:

_Preparing the release candidate_
The latest created packages (http://origin.releases.qt-project.org/digia/5.0.0_rc1/backups/2012-12-05-366/) are looking pretty good (a few issues remaining, but it is in a state that can be released).

We agreed to wait for a new round of packaging, during the workday tomorrow (European time), evaluate which package is best suited for being the release candidate.

Hanne will coordinate the efforts, and the release team participants who are currently in Europe has the authority to make a go/no-go decisoin tomorrow.

_Next release team meeting_
Next release team meeting will be in wk 50.

Best regards,
Sinan S. Tanilkan
on behalf of the Qt 5 releasing team

Irc log from the meeting:
[16:00:42] <SinanTanilkan> thiago, steveire, tjenssen, mauricek, treinio, lars, joaijala, iieklund__, sahumada, hanne, andre_: Ping
[16:00:47] <mauricek> SinanTanilkan: pong :)
[16:00:47] <sahumada> pong
[16:00:50] <andre_> pong
[16:00:52] --> hanne (~linaae at has joined #qt-releases
[16:00:53] <lars> SinanTanilkan: pong
[16:00:57] <treinio_> pong
[16:01:01] <hanne> pong
[16:01:31] <johanna> pong
[16:02:07] <SinanTanilkan> johanna and iieklund: Thanks for helping out today, even when it's ment to be a day off for you.
[16:02:19] <SinanTanilkan> I propose we use the same agenda as yesterday.
[16:02:27] <hanne> tomorrow is the day off..
[16:02:33] <SinanTanilkan> Ah. Ok.
[16:02:37] <johanna> SinanTanilkan: tomorrow is our holiday
[16:02:42] <mauricek> doesn't lower their effort...
[16:02:43] --> thiago (~thiago at kde/thiago) has joined #qt-releases
[16:02:49] <hanne> true!
[16:02:53] <SinanTanilkan> 1. Update on the packages that are currently available
[16:03:11] <johanna> yes
[16:03:32] <johanna> all installers should have docs now
[16:03:47] <johanna> they are manually copied from linux packages by kai and iikka
[16:04:01] <johanna> (I have no more details of that)
[16:04:24] <johanna> otherwise they are quite the same as yesterday
[16:04:30] <hanne> kkoehne: maybe you have the latest update?
[16:04:31] <andre_> kkoehne: ^^
[16:05:07] <kkoehne> Sry. Yes, we updated documentation and examples in 356
[16:05:21] <sahumada> 365
[16:05:32] <kkoehne> 365 :) E.g. Table of Content looks better now.
[16:05:50] <kkoehne> However, the 366 mac packages got a lot bigger.
[16:06:10] <kkoehne> Because apparently in the repackaging step symbolic links became regular files
[16:06:37] <hanne> kkoehne: what are the other differences between 365 and 366?
[16:06:46] <thiago> 1
[16:06:48] <thiago> :-)
[16:06:53] <SinanTanilkan> He he...
[16:07:12] <kkoehne> QtOpenGL documentation shows up. Some non-working examples do not show up in the Welcome Screen any more.
[16:07:18] <mauricek> kkoehne: we should also check after RC for object files
[16:07:20] <hanne> thiago: :) well spotted
[16:07:31] <mauricek> kkoehne: just see that the examples have lots of .o files included
[16:07:43] <kkoehne> mauricek: Huh? 365 or 366 ?
[16:07:55] <mauricek> kkoehne: the one from this morning, so 365 most likely
[16:08:05] <kkoehne> mauricek: Okay, could be.
[16:08:25] <kkoehne> mauricek: So all in all I think 366 is in a better state, just that on Mac it's 700 MB bigger :)
[16:08:32] <mauricek> kkoehne:  but not for all, mostly examples/browser and examples/webkit
[16:08:36] <andre_> mauricek: we still build the examples
[16:08:42] <mauricek> andre_: right...
[16:08:51] <mauricek> anyways, sorry for sidetracking
[16:08:53] <andre_> which we don't want in the final, so chances to get .o should be slim
[16:09:19] <-- windows8 (~quassel at 202.84-49-38.nextgentel.com) has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
[16:09:34] <SinanTanilkan> kkoehne, mauricek, andre_: What is your advice regarding these packages and rc?
[16:09:36] <andre_> regarding the broken examples: main reason are broken manifest.xml now
[16:09:49] <mauricek> SinanTanilkan: not as pessimistic as before ;)
[16:09:59] <andre_> there were a handful with broken qthelp:// urls, all these show up white in creator
[16:10:30] <andre_> we have fixes for part of that currently trickling through ci
[16:10:39] <kkoehne> SinanTanilkan: I'd love to be able still fix the packaging issues (broken manifest files, size bloat on Mac). But I don't know whether we have time for this.
[16:10:53] <kkoehne> iieklund: Are you there?
[16:11:00] <mauricek> kkoehne: I would vote for having those fixed in the final
[16:11:12] <sahumada> kkoehne: no .. he said we wont make it for this meeting
[16:11:17] <kkoehne> mauricek: I wouldn't object.
[16:11:17] <johanna> I think iieklund is not online
[16:11:23] <tuukkat> Has 365 been tested, would it be fit to release in case needed? Maybe it can be used as backup, and we try one more build round?
[16:11:33] <andre_> some are worked on, and creator 2.6 now simply does not display the broken examples (unless started with QTC_DEBUG_EXAMPLESMODEL=1 for debugging pruposes)
[16:11:36] <tuukkat> However is there anyone to fix things before we build?
[16:11:54] <kkoehne> tuukkat: Problem is that packaging requires now human intervention, which Iikka did so f ar.
[16:12:14] <kkoehne> tuukkat: So the risk is high we don't do it right on the first try if somebody else tries it.
[16:12:37] <mauricek> tuukkat: with public holiday tomorrow I doubt we can generate new packages as we would like them to be. And current ones are a significant increase in quality
[16:12:37] <hanne> tuukkat: it is a day off in finland tomorrow, not sure if kkoehne can help
[16:12:38] <kkoehne> tuukkat: I can try though ...
[16:12:39] <johanna> afaik only thing to do manually is to copy the docs and examples
[16:12:51] <tuukkat> So someone from berlin/oslo would need to do it tomorrow morinng?
[16:12:55] <hanne> i think we can use the current ones
[16:13:22] <sahumada> I vote for 366 to be a rc .. mac is only 56M bigger
[16:13:32] <SinanTanilkan> hanne: When you say use the current ones, do you mean as a rc?
[16:13:38] <hanne> yes
[16:13:48] <SinanTanilkan> Ok. Any objections to what sahumada proposed?
[16:14:03] <tuukkat> Akseli recommended to run the build during the night, i.e. have bamboo restart in the evening.
[16:14:19] <mauricek> tuukkat: kkoehne: let's ask the other way around, what do we expect to be fixed until tomorrow morning?
[16:14:21] <johanna> does anyone know what went wrong with mac, I mean the installer size and the symbolic links?
[16:14:42] <kkoehne> joaijala: I guess iikka repackaged on windows
[16:14:54] <lars> the size on the mac is IMO not a huge issue for the RC if the content still works
[16:15:07] <kkoehne> mauricek: Non-working examples excluded from welcome screen, smaller size on mac.
[16:15:13] <tuukkat> mauricek: I understood that 365 was otherwise good, but mac broke. If it did not, great. Size does not matter
[16:15:22] <sahumada> mauricek: tuukkat: this are the current fixes for tomorrow if we update qtsdk.git now https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,41840
[16:15:24] <tuukkat> as I have been told :)
[16:15:30] <andre_> SinanTanilkan: as long as the understanding is that 366 is not suitable for a final release, but "good enough for general testing and use" I wouldn't object
[16:15:33] <mauricek> tuukkat: ;)
[16:15:39] <kkoehne> sahumada: And https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,41861
[16:15:46] <sahumada> kkoehne: true :)
[16:16:50] <SinanTanilkan> I have a proposal:
[16:16:56] <tuukkat> I would like very much if we can decide 366 is good enough, and try to still get a better one if we can.
[16:17:06] <lars> hiding non working examples would be good to have
[16:17:08] <kkoehne> sahumada: Do you have an overview what https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,41840,patchset=3 really contains?
[16:17:17] <tuukkat> Then test tomorro an use the best one to go out in the late afternoon.
[16:17:41] <sahumada> kkoehne: it's there .. in the comments
[16:17:47] <tijensse> kkoehne: just see the comment inside the patch
[16:18:07] <SinanTanilkan> I agree with tuukkat's proposal.
[16:18:18] <SinanTanilkan> Let's have a look at the blocker list for 366.
[16:18:41] <hanne> tuukkat: at what time tomorrow should we have it out?
[16:19:11] <tijensse> https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-28336 <- this isn't a blocker there was a small missunderstanding what the result of that bug is ... kai please change that, or should I?
[16:19:27] <lars> hanne: I could announce it during the keynote. ie. ~9:30-10am
[16:19:32] <treinio_> tijensse: i can do it
[16:19:39] <tuukkat> That means 18.30 Oslo time
[16:19:45] <kkoehne> tijensse: Ossi still thinks it's a severe issue, though
[16:19:50] <hanne> lars: tuukkat : ok
[16:20:04] <SinanTanilkan> Any objections to releasing at 18.30?
[16:20:14] <hanne> lars, tuukkat : but can we have it out before?
[16:20:18] <thiago> releasing what? 365, 366 or another one?
[16:20:26] <hanne> like during working hours.
[16:20:31] <tuukkat> Hanne, Yes. No problem.
[16:20:35] <SinanTanilkan> thiago: depends on what we decide in the release team.
[16:20:36] <hanne> 366
[16:21:01] <andre_> thiago: proposal was to release best_of({365,366,367})
[16:21:04] <SinanTanilkan> I don't think there is any reasson to wait until 18.30 tomorrow if we know we will release 366.
[16:21:12] <-- tapadar_ (~tapadar at has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
[16:21:21] <lars> thiago: I think we talked about 366 as a candiate. Then try to get udated packages with the fixes mentioned above (in qtsdk and qtcreator) and test these tomorrow during the day
[16:21:22] <SinanTanilkan> We should do that only if we think there might be a 367 that's better.
[16:21:27] <lars> then decide which one is better
[16:21:35] <tuukkat> I think it would be great to take another run and test 366 and the new ones during tomorrow, and release the best one - or in case of serious issue not to release.
[16:21:41] <thiago> andre_: sounds good
[16:21:45] <kkoehne> SinanTanilkan: We think so. Examples in welcome screen will hopefully be fixed, finally.
[16:21:55] <SinanTanilkan> Ok.
[16:22:20] <hanne> SinanTanilkan: is marketing ok with the timing too? (apart from gurudutt - i have talked with him)
[16:22:22] <sahumada> kkoehne: will you do the manual work ?
[16:22:25] <tuukkat> Akseli, do you recommend running the packaging toningt in the regular time?
[16:22:35] <kkoehne> sahumada: I can try tomorrow morning, yes.
[16:22:37] <SinanTanilkan> I'll talk with kathy today.
[16:22:47] <hanne> SinanTanilkan: ok
[16:22:59] -*- lars will write a blog post today then
[16:23:13] <SinanTanilkan> There are still bugs on the Qt 5.0 Final release tasks list.
[16:23:24] <SinanTanilkan> Should we go trough them and see if they should still be there?
[16:23:36] <tuukkat> That would be good
[16:23:41] <akseli> tuukkat: according to normal build cycle has less risks for failure although delays build results. I can disable power off\on builds if decided otherwise.
[16:23:42] <SinanTanilkan> treinio_: ^^
[16:23:44] <thiago> we publish the list of what is there
[16:24:12] <SinanTanilkan> treinio_: I agree. But should we have an rc if there is something still on the must have list?
[16:24:23] <thiago> it's clear that RC1 isn't final (so technically it isn't a candidate), but we need to get more testing in other areas
[16:24:24] <SinanTanilkan> Sorry. Previous message was for thiago
[16:24:32] <treinio_> SinanTanilkan: there are a couple of items, yes
[16:24:32] <tuukkat> kkoehne: are you ok with the regular timing as akseli recomended?
[16:24:53] <thiago> SinanTanilkan: I think we need to release. The alternative to that is calling this beta 3, but that's actually even harder.
[16:24:54] <kkoehne> tuukkat: Yes. Even if we trigger a build now, most of us will be not working when it finally fails ;)
[16:25:01] <thiago> so let's release RC1 with a KnownIssues list
[16:25:16] <johanna> akseli, tuukkat: I would suggest not to disable the bamboo boot, there is the risk that builds will fail
[16:25:17] <SinanTanilkan> thiago: Ok.
[16:25:34] <kkoehne> We should just make sure not to overdo it. People will try one or to RC, but they won't test the 6th any more.
[16:26:06] <tuukkat> hopefully we do not need 6
[16:26:21] <hanne> this is the current know issues list: http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt500RC1KnownIssues
[16:26:22] <lars> kkoehne: agreed. we need to get to the final quickly now. but the currently list doesn't look like we'll ned 6.
[16:26:33] <kkoehne> lars: I hope so.
[16:26:38] <mauricek> how many people outside actually tested? I didn't get many (if any at all) release testing mails during this week
[16:26:47] <andre_> the 366 looks a lot better than beta2
[16:26:59] <kkoehne> will be the best qt 5 release ever ;)
[16:27:00] <lars> hanne: aren't the first two on that list mostly fixed?
[16:27:01] <tuukkat> mauricek: that is the point.
[16:27:03] <treinio_> QTBUG-28336 <- not a blocker anymore, QTBUG-27853 is a P1 because it's a crash (but a corner case), QTBUG-28296 looks better in 366 than previously
[16:27:15] <tuukkat> sorry for bold
[16:27:17] <thiago> mauricek: which is why we need to release :-)
[16:27:30] <tuukkat> WE do get a lot more testing when we blog about the rc
[16:27:36] <mauricek> thiago: I am fine with that under current situation
[16:27:38] <hanne> lars: yes, the first one maybe, but the second is still valid
[16:28:08] <hanne> lars: we need to go through the list again, and make sure it is correct
[16:28:31] <lars> hanne: please do :)
[16:28:38] <treinio_> lars, hanne: went though the list 30min ago
[16:28:47] <lars> treinio_: cool, thanks
[16:28:50] <SinanTanilkan> treinio_: Do we propose taking all of them off the must have list?
[16:28:58] <treinio_> the first one is mostly fixed, yes
[16:29:08] <SinanTanilkan> Sorry. Mostly fixed?
[16:29:22] <treinio_> SinanTanilkan: talking about known issues...
[16:29:26] <treinio_> in wiki
[16:29:47] <lars> SinanTanilkan: treinio_: assume activeqt docs are still missing, as we build the docs on linux
[16:29:56] <SinanTanilkan> treinio_: Ok. But it would be good to know what the status on QTBUG-27426 is. 
[16:30:14] <lars> if yes, might make sense to update the description in known issues to reflect that
[16:30:19] <andre_> QTBUG-28393 is also not a blocker. I see currently 155 examples that do show up, and the broken ones won't be visible (or fixed...) in 367, certainly before next week
[16:30:43] <tuukkat> The known issues list can contain accurate description of the level of problem still present and link to the original bug (that is partially fixed)
[16:31:01] <treinio_> lars: most probably is, will check that
[16:31:07] <lars> treinio_: thx
[16:31:23] <tuukkat> And in case the bug is mostly fixed, it does not need to be in the known issues list (we need items there to guide what we expect people to report)
[16:31:40] <SinanTanilkan> I don't see why we want to go trough the known issues list. If it's a must have, we have it on QTBUG-27426 right? 
[16:31:48] <SinanTanilkan> So QTBUG-27426 should be the list to look at, right?
[16:32:30] <treinio_> SinanTanilkan: yes. activeqt docs missing (if true) is not there, though
[16:32:41] <hanne> SinanTanilkan: i think it is easier to point to a know issues page than jira in the blog etc
[16:33:08] <SinanTanilkan> hanne: True. But when we make a go/no-go decison, it should be based on QTBUG-27426.
[16:33:24] <kkoehne> SinanTanilkan: It's true, since we build the documentation on Linux, where activeqt docs won't be generated.
[16:33:30] <hanne> SinanTanilkan: true
[16:33:37] <SinanTanilkan> The known issues list should also contain things that are not blockers. So it's not the right inputs for go/nogo.
[16:34:04] <hanne> SinanTanilkan: and also maybe we link to jira  from the know issues page?
[16:34:05] <treinio_> if we're being pedantic, QTBUG-27426 is for final, though, not rc
[16:34:13] <SinanTanilkan> hanne:  Good idea.
[16:34:31] <thiago> technically speaking, we call this a Release Candidate if the list of 5.0 blockers is empty
[16:34:36] <thiago> if not, we release beta 3
[16:34:37] <kkoehne> treinio_: If we're being pedantic, a RC is a candidate for being the final.
[16:34:45] <SinanTanilkan> treinio_: True. But the go/nogo for the rc, should at least use the same data as the final.
[16:35:01] <treinio_> true
[16:35:02] <thiago> true and I agree
[16:35:11] <thiago> however, I think *we* shouldn't make that decision
[16:35:18] <SinanTanilkan> Ok. So let's ensure that QTBUG-27426 is up to date.
[16:35:23] <thiago> the RT checks if the package build worked and the expected fixes are there
[16:35:34] <thiago> then we release RC and ask the world to check if there are no blockers left
[16:35:45] <thiago> if there aren't, we repackage and release as final
[16:35:56] <thiago> if there are, we wait for the fixes and start the cycle over
[16:36:08] <SinanTanilkan> thiago: I agree.
[16:36:16] <lars> thiago: +1
[16:36:27] <tuukkat> yes
[16:36:37] <SinanTanilkan> Ok. Going trough QTBUG-27426 should take us about 2 min. Shall we do that?
[16:36:44] <tuukkat> yes
[16:36:54] <SinanTanilkan> treinio_: Could you please take us trough it?
[16:36:58] <treinio_> yes
[16:37:13] <treinio_> https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-28336
[16:37:37] <treinio_> discussed above, important but not a blocker
[16:37:48] <SinanTanilkan> Ok. Then i suggest we take it off the list.
[16:38:13] <treinio_> https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-27853
[16:38:14] <kkoehne> Why? WE've to fix it for the final.
[16:38:32] <SinanTanilkan> Then it should be on the list.
[16:38:45] <kkoehne> QTBUG-27853 is a crash in a corner case.
[16:38:48] <andre_> treinio: ossi is on QTBUG-28336
[16:39:10] <treinio_> kkoehne: yes, a corner case that's a P1 because it's a crash
[16:39:21] <treinio_> so it go off the list, maybe
[16:39:42] <treinio_> https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-28296
[16:39:53] <andre_> QTBUG-27853 is not a blocker
[16:40:03] <kkoehne> treinio_: It's a crash affecting just a corner case :) I think we can live with it for the 5.0.
[16:40:12] <tuukkat> agree
[16:40:23] <SinanTanilkan> Any objections?
[16:40:35] <lars> yes, we'll find more of those
[16:40:41] <lars> no objections
[16:41:03] <treinio_> deployment of example directories are a bit confusing (QTBUG-28296)
[16:41:18] <treinio_> but it has improved
[16:41:39] <treinio_> and with the decision to remove example binaries it'll improve more
[16:41:47] <SinanTanilkan> So, should we keep it on the list, or does it meet our ambitions for the final?
[16:41:58] <rosch> I think examples are important to work, because that is what most new users (people not familliar with Qt) will use
[16:42:18] <lars> treinio_: the repository should not really be visible in the location of the examples. only the module should
[16:42:25] <rosch> and if that doens't work, it leaves a very bad impression, that all of Qt is not working
[16:42:30] <andre_> treinio: there are changes for part of that in the ci already
[16:42:50] <SinanTanilkan> rosch: That is a very general statement that we all agree with. The question is if this issue is a problem or not.
[16:43:03] <sahumada> rosch: as far as I understand .. the examples work .. they are just misplaced
[16:43:07] <treinio_> andre_: ok
[16:43:54] <hanne> rosch: we can fix that for the final
[16:43:54] <thiago> can creator find them?
[16:43:54] <treinio_> rosch: they work just fine from creator
[16:44:59] <lars> if that's the case, it's not blocking IMO.
[16:45:16] <SinanTanilkan> Any objections to taking it of the list?
[16:45:23] <treinio_> not from me
[16:45:31] <SinanTanilkan> Ok. Please do that then.
[16:45:40] <treinio_> SinanTanilkan: ok
[16:46:10] <SinanTanilkan> How about  QTWEBKIT-383?
[16:46:24] <thiago> has that been reproduced?
[16:46:27] <lars> I heard pierre was on it.
[16:46:38] <lars> thiago: yes, a bug in qfontdatabase on windows apparently
[16:46:46] <thiago> is it a corner case?
[16:46:48] <kkoehne> Seems to be fixed. https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,41751
[16:46:49] <thiago> or does it happen often?
[16:46:50] <lars> talked with tronical about it
[16:47:27] <lars> ok is that fix in qtsdk.git already?
[16:48:27] <SinanTanilkan> It seems the fix is older than the last questions on the jira task.
[16:48:35] <SinanTanilkan> maybe we should leave it here until we have more information
[16:48:36] <sahumada> lars: will be in tomorrow's packages https://codereview.qt-project.org/41840
[16:49:04] <thiago> lars: qtsdk.git is two commits behind
[16:49:29] <lars> ok.
[16:49:41] <SinanTanilkan> Any other issues that should be brought up:
[16:50:00] <SinanTanilkan> Sorry. it was meant to be a question.
[16:50:19] <SinanTanilkan> Ok. Let's agree on the next steps then.
[16:50:20] <treinio_> SinanTanilkan: apart from the documentation metabug, that was it
[16:50:22] -*- thiago has one not about the release, so he'll wait
[16:50:23] <rosch> will both teh commericial and open source packages tested ?
[16:50:32] <thiago> rosch: tested by whom?
[16:50:44] <rosch> thiago: someone
[16:50:47] <rosch> anyone :)
[16:50:57] <sahumada> this is only about opensource I guess
[16:50:57] <thiago> well, yes, they will be tested
[16:51:07] <thiago> after we release them, I imagine commercial customers will test them
[16:51:22] <rosch> so no package testing before release?
[16:51:28] --> roquetto (~quassel at has joined #qt-releases
[16:51:33] <tuukkat> Would assume so. Many have tested the beta already.
[16:51:34] <thiago> rosch: I asked "by whom" and you answered "someone". That includes customers :-)
[16:51:43] <tuukkat> rosch: do not worry. naturally we test
[16:51:59] <SinanTanilkan> Ok. Let's look at the next steps.
[16:52:05] <thiago> if you meant before the release, I would suggest that they get tested by the same quality standards.
[16:52:14] <SinanTanilkan> New packages will hopefully be made tomorrow.
[16:52:16] <tuukkat> thiago: yes.
[16:52:18] <rosch> thiago: well, yes. I should have added before release :)
[16:52:34] <thiago> the Qt Project is happy to accommodate repackaging to match the commercial release, so everyone gets the same code at the same time.
[16:53:41] <SinanTanilkan> In the release team meeting tomorrow (same time), we will evaluate if 366 or a new set of packages should be an rc, going out at 18.30 cet.
[16:53:50] <thiago> wait
[16:53:55] <SinanTanilkan> thiago: Ok.
[16:54:00] <thiago> hadn't hanne asked to release at work time?
[16:54:09] <SinanTanilkan> thiago: :) Good
[16:54:20] <kkoehne> thiago: It's released when lars blogs about it :)
[16:54:26] <thiago> sure
[16:54:29] <SinanTanilkan> Let's see if we can accomodate that.
[16:54:31] <kkoehne> thiago: We can upload packages etc before, though.
[16:54:58] <thiago> right, that means people in europe choose which of the builds to release
[16:55:06] <tuukkat> I am ok to start release team mtg 1 hour earlier
[16:55:07] <thiago> best_of(365,366,367)
[16:55:24] <tuukkat> And I am also ok with you calling the shots
[16:55:24] <SinanTanilkan> thiago: I agree.
[16:55:37] <tuukkat> so no meeting needed
[16:55:42] <tuukkat> ?
[16:55:42] <thiago> can we do this instead: people in europe choose which one is best and upload everything, no meeting needed for that
[16:55:50] <tuukkat> yes
[16:55:51] <thiago> we just meet at this hour for final check
[16:55:54] <SinanTanilkan> thiago: I agree.
[16:55:57] -*- kkoehne wonders whether we have people for everything (updating origin.releases etc) with FInland being on holiday
[16:55:58] <thiago> "are we all on the same page"
[16:56:02] <hanne> thiago: sounds good to me
[16:56:05] <thiago> hoping that it is, we push the button
[16:56:13] <thiago> is that acceptable from an infra & marketing point of view?
[16:56:25] <sahumada> kkoehne: I can upload the packages and create the tags
[16:56:34] <kkoehne> sahumada: Cool.
[16:56:44] <SinanTanilkan> thiago: I'll talk with kathy from marketing today.
[16:56:52] <hanne> kkoehne: think we have the steps needed under control
[16:57:13] <tuukkat> thiago: should be ok to post the blog earlier than the keynote starts, but we will check today
[16:57:19] <lars> sounds good. I'll sit down (maybe grab someone here to help) and write the blog
[16:57:24] <SinanTanilkan> hanne: I hope you can drive this decisoin tomorrow?
[16:57:28] <thiago> yeah, I don't mind at all that it gets released on European time
[16:57:35] <hanne> SinanTanilkan: yes
[16:58:00] <hanne> we can have a european meeting earlier in the day
[16:58:28] <SinanTanilkan> Ok. Good. Let me see if i get this right: Hanne will facilitate a go/nogo decision with the people from the release team who are in europe. Whenever they decide to release the rc, it will be released.
[16:58:42] <SinanTanilkan> Agree?
[16:58:52] -*- andre_ nods
[16:59:01] -*- kkoehne too
[16:59:03] <hanne> SinanTanilkan: shall we agree on a time? 11am cet?
[16:59:05] <mauricek> jup
[16:59:14] -*- sahumada will update qtsdk.git latest today 18:30 Oslo time .. so that will be 367 (https://codereview.qt-project.org/41861 + https://codereview.qt-project.org/41840)
[16:59:20] <tuukkat> Yes. Naturally in sync with getting the packages out (Sergio, Akseli) and blog out (Anca, Lars)
[16:59:50] -*- treinio_ agrees
[17:00:02] <SinanTanilkan> hanne: Will you handle the sync with sahumada and akseli?
[17:00:07] <hanne> also docs on dev net needs to be updated - gurudutt and jerome are on that
[17:00:23] <hanne> SinanTanilkan: sure
[17:00:34] <SinanTanilkan> lars: If you make the blog post available for hanne, I'll talk with anca/kathy about the rest from marketing.
[17:00:36] <lars> hanne: isn't 11am too tight for doing testing of 367 and deciding?
[17:01:00] <hanne> lars: i thought we test first, and decide at 11
[17:01:16] <lars> hanne: do you have anyone in Oslo with enough blog engine powers to publish a post written by me?
[17:01:17] <andre_> hanne: maybe a bit later?
[17:01:19] <hanne> can also do earlier
[17:01:23] <shiroki> sahumada: will the changed merged now be taken to the new package?
[17:01:34] <kkoehne> hanne: Well, I've to do the re-packaging thing, so packages aren't available until 10:30 or so.
[17:01:48] <SinanTanilkan> hanne, lars: Gurudutt has blogging superpowers.
[17:01:56] <andre_> getting packages, installing, running through stuff takes a bit
[17:01:58] <lars> SinanTanilkan: ok, good
[17:01:58] <hanne> lars: not sure - SinanTanilkan : is that gurudutt who has blog powers?
[17:02:02] <sahumada> shiroki: which one :)
[17:02:04] <tuukkat> There was a manual step? That means as early as someone is in +1 hour there are packages?
[17:02:35] <mauricek> tuukkat: yes, doc repackaging from linux
[17:02:37] <tuukkat> lars, it is easy: reset your password and give it to Hanne. She can log in as you.
[17:02:52] <hanne> kkoehne: ok, so we should meet later? earlier?
[17:02:53] <lars> tuukkat: no need. gurudutt can publish
[17:02:56] <kkoehne> hanne: later.
[17:03:02] <mauricek> hanne: bit later
[17:03:16] <hanne> kkoehne mauricek : 12?
[17:03:21] <kkoehne> hanne: Sounds good.
[17:03:28] <andre_> better.
[17:03:36] <mauricek> ok
[17:03:59] <tuukkat> hanne: please notify Andy Shaw what is the time to release
[17:04:09] <hanne> ok - we meet at 12 on irc, and if we need more time, we will meet again later
[17:04:13] <hanne> tuukkat: ok
[17:04:29] <kkoehne> hanne: +1
[17:04:35] <SinanTanilkan> Sounds good.
[17:04:36] <kkoehne> hanne: I mean, yes, sounds good :)
[17:04:49] <hanne> kkoehne: good
[17:04:57] <sahumada> hanne: will you send the release email to announce@ releasing@ development@ ?
[17:04:57] <mauricek> ok, are we done?
[17:04:59] <SinanTanilkan> I don't see a reasson for further meetings after the release is out tomorrow. Any objectoins?
[17:05:06] <mauricek> SinanTanilkan: +1
[17:05:17] <SinanTanilkan> Ok. I guess that's all for this meeting.
[17:05:21] <hanne> lars: will you send the emails ^
[17:05:24] <SinanTanilkan> Thanks for your time.
[17:05:25] <hanne> ?
[17:05:38] <thiago> SinanTanilkan: we resume meetings for RC2
[17:05:38] <SinanTanilkan> And i'm looking forward to waking up to a release tomorrow...
[17:05:54] <SinanTanilkan> thiago: Absolutely. Let's plan for a meeting next week.
[17:05:55] <hanne> SinanTanilkan: :)
[17:05:55] <-- hihrig_ (~quassel at cm- has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
[17:05:58] <lars> hanne: hmmm... difficult at that time of the night. I could send them once I'm awake
[17:06:08] <hanne> lars: isn't that ok?
[17:06:16] <lars> fine for me
[17:06:19] <hanne> lars: doesn't all have to be at the same time
[17:06:32] <-- johanna (~jaijala at dsl-olubrasgw2-fe61f800-67.dhcp.inet.fi) has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
[17:06:32] <hanne> lars: it is nicer if it comes from you
[17:06:39] <lars> sure, will do.
[17:06:41] <tuukkat> It would be good that HAnne send it to dev&rel list when blog is out
[17:07:08] <hanne> tuukkat: ok with me
[17:07:14] <hanne> lars ^
[17:07:15] <tuukkat> I mean, it shoudl not be a problem is HAnne send the email written by Lars
[17:07:33] <lars> ok.
[17:07:47] <thiago> we don't need lars to announce on the ML
[17:07:50] <thiago> it can be anyone
[17:08:40] <hanne> ok so lars you will send me the text for the emails, and i will send out?
[17:09:08] <lars> hanne: sure, that's fine. just make sure to talk to matias, so you can post to announce@
[17:09:31] <hanne> lars: ok, cannot anyone do that?
[17:09:46] <lars> hanne: no, posting to announce is moderated
[17:10:02] <lars> hanne: mrand can sort it out for you
[17:10:13] <hanne> lars: ok
[17:10:29] <lars> hanne: I'll work on things today and send you everything tonight (US time)
[17:12:02] -*- sahumada says see you tomorrow
[17:12:14] <thiago> are we done?
[17:12:19] <SinanTanilkan> We are done.

More information about the Releasing mailing list