Next release version #426
Comments
|
Makes sense to me, given #421 |
|
Sounds reasonable to me too. Anything in particular we'd like to mark as milestones for v1.0 ? |
|
Wasn't the original goal of the project to offer a PuppetDB backed dashboard to replace the old Ruby dashboard? |
|
I agree. It is way better even. |
|
My suggested milestone list for 1.0.0:
|
|
#283 and #360 are pretty much the same. And a general reminder, if someone would like to remove Python 2.6 support from release 1.0.0, remember that 2.6 is still the Python shipped on EL 6. Since containers can't run properly on the EL 6 Kernel, only alternative would be to install a newer Python from Software Collections. |
|
I picked those two because they were already planned for 0.3.0 at the time. |
|
I suggest using new script for sorting tables, as current sorter cannot handle ip adresses, time (days, hours) and memory |
|
Any suggestions for a better sorter, @emlun007 ? :) |
|
@larsnaesbye , https://github.com/christianbach/tablesorter |
|
Or maybe we should simply make a 1.0 release now? |
|
@mterzo - any things you think holds a 1.0 release back? |
|
@larsnaesbye why do you care so much. It's just a number. Also there are so many issues open right now. Fix something instead of bothering about version number over and over again. I don't mean to be rude but I honestly feel like @mterzo is getting spammed lately. Also @emlun007 if you open a PR it should be working or at least semi-working, if it is semi-working describe what works and what doesn't. |
|
@emlun007 you have a point, I have had a PR open for a long time too. I'm frustrated with this repo because I get so many notifications but there are never any updates. Someone else should be added to the project to sort through everything... |
|
@larsnaesbye sorry if that was harsh. I'm having a rough morning. Cheers |
|
@kirkins, I have code for new PRs but I don't want to spam too much, so I'm just waiting for the first one to be merged. It's been three months soon 🐌 🐌 🐌 |
|
@kirkins no problem mate. I'll go fix one of the things alright :-) |
|
Any idea when a new version will be released? |
|
Hi all. Is it possible, by any chance, to RELEASE THE KRAKEN ? |
|
@florinbesleaga Now the codename has to be 1.0 Kraken :-D |
|
@wyardley Thank you very much for the pull request merge. Do you think it's possible to make a release from the current trunk, as version 0.3.1? It would help some of us quite a bit. |
|
Agreed! Would be great! |
|
@larsnaesbye I haven’t worked on this project much so probably someone else should cut the release. Maybe post in the Vox channel on IRC and see if someone can do that. |
|
Is this project even active? |
|
Somewhat, yes. |
|
I have now joined the Freenode IRC channel #voxpupuli - here's hoping we can find some guidance there :-) |
|
I have had a single conversation on #voxpupuli - but not much have come out of it. There are many good patches waiting for merging, and a potential for a real good new release - but there is no automation set up for the release process, and that kept the good folks over at #voxpupuli from jumping in. |
|
@anarcat The last time I had looked, I don't think voxpupuli was a contributer on the PyPI project. But also, I don't think "all" of voxpupuli directly has access -- I'm not sure who has access to the voxpupuliorg account in PyPI, but maybe someone else knows. I am pretty confident that this is not an account that any vox contributor has access to. I think Vox has folks who are able to review PRs and merge them; it's getting things actually published that's been sticky so far; when I've asked on IRC and Slack, it doesn't seem like anyone really knows, and it also doesn't seem like there's any automated process setup. |
|
Look again 😉
voxpupuliorg is probably owned by the PMC, so at the very least they can add additional people there if that's what's holding this back. THat's probably also the account that could be piggy-backed on for some more automatic release process. If someone wants to build a milestone for 1.0, spawn the necessary tickets, changelog updates etc. I'm happy to do the actual uploading to PyPi. |
|
Yes, I see that it's there now, I just meant that I didn't remember it being there when I looked a while back. Could be wrong though. |
|
@daenney , I guess there is a consensus that 1.0 is pretty much ready (?), so only the changelog and perhaps updated screenshots are needed. |
|
@anarcat I'm not sure why you got the impression I ask someone to work for free? What I actually said is that the project looks abandoned and therefor it would be hard to justify to get time to work on it. I had the impression from previous comments that voxpupuli can't release to pypi and that is the actual blocker. |
|
On 2019-05-23 22:58:28, Andreas Zuber wrote:
@anarcat I'm not sure why you got the impression I ask someone to work for free?
Are you offering to pay?
|
|
Hi people. Can we stop the snapping at each other please? I'd like to get back to the topic on hand, releasing a new version. |
Sure, my apologies. I didn't mean to snap.
I woud personnally keep the required changes to the utter minimum to avoid pushing this any further aside. I have this in the checklist now:
You proposed updating the screenshots, but I would suggest this is slightly superfluous... Did things change that much visually that we can't live with the current ones? |
|
Nope, they didn’t And it certainly can wait until after a release :) |
|
by the way, i must say i truly appreciate that an actual unicorn came in here to calm me down. thanks @daenney :) |
|
#502 is my attempt at a pull request for a simple changelog and version update. |
|
Glad to see progress on this! Me too I have #477 that I'd like to be included if possible. I'll take care of resolving the rebase conflicts tomorrow (sorry, don't have access right now) |
|
I'll adjust the Changelog if more PRs get merged, of course. |
|
@alexjfisher : Sorry to ask you yet again, but do think the PRs #438 #439 and #441 could get merged? |
|
Sorry for commenting and maybe trigger some people again, but why not just give @larsnaesbye commit and publish rights? |
|
That's not what we're here to discuss right now and there's a process to go through to do that. Lets stay on topic please, which is the release. Feel free to file a separate issue and tag the PMC on it. |
|
i agree that we shouldn't get lost in "what possible pending PR we could merge before release problem". if the PR isn't merged, it's not going to get merged before the release. we can always make new releases later. if you want your PR to get merged, get it reviewed: that can be done by someone else on your team or any other user of GitHub. right now, there is zero PR that has a positive review and that passes test (apart from the changelog one), so it's unlikely anyone here will have time to fix that before the release. let's just get this show on the road! |
|
It looks like I caused some confusion there. My response was to the "why don't we just give X commit access". W.r.t the pending PRs, if people can commit time in the next week to get those reviewed and rebased I think we can wait for that. But if it's going to take more time this risks stalling again which would be a shame. I'm entirely happy to accept external/first-time reviewers on any of the pending PRs, none look particularly complex. |
|
@anarcat one of my PRs is fixing the graph on the node page. It wasn't merged because someone was going to do it a different way. That was 2 years ago. I guess I'll come back in another 2 years and see if he had the time. |
Snark isn't helping. I know it's annoying that PRs linger and for that I'm sorry. However, people have lives too and that can take priority over things. You can use the mailing lists or reach out to the PMC directly if you'd like to bring attention to this problem. |
|
@anarcat as for your rant on not getting paid for this you had above. I wouldn't pay you a dime. This project had potential and it's been completely neglected. On top of that you haven't even contributed to this project. For you to come here are start talking about money is an insult to those of us who have donated our time to fixing bugs but were completely ignored. |
|
Oy. I've asked people to stop snapping at each other. So stop. I'm not going to ask again. Whatever issues you might have with each other, this is not the place. @anarcat was kind enough to recognize that and leave it for what it was. I expect you to do the same @kirkins. And anyone else that's participating on a Vox Pupuli project. |
|
One other question — is it intentional or accidental that Vox contributors don’t have approval or merge access on this repo anymore? I know there was some team shuffling so maybe accidental? |
|
Also, totally agree with shipping first, then merging more changes vs vice-versa. |
|
Accidental-intentional. B/c pypuppetdb and puppetboard are very different beasts from most of the other things in Vox:
We early on created a separate team to gate access to these repos. I stepped away from both projects a long time ago so my write access was rightfully removed. Unfortunately the two maintainers appear to have lost interest or be otherwise occupied which caused this to block. I've got my write access back though so I can start pushing things through now. |
|
@daenney Hi!
That's indeed correct. #498 (comment) |
|
Yeah they did, thanks @alexjfisher |
|
Hi people. I had a discussion with @mterzo a few days ago. We added our PyPi account voxpupuliorg to both projects, so we can now do releases as an org and not only from individual accounts. Both projects have a PR open to automate the release process with travis. Anyone that feels confident with python can review them: Let us know if one of you wants to spend more time on one/both projects and we can grant merge permissions here. |
Should we finally make the leap to 1.0.0 for the next release?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: