-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31.4k
Release procedure changes & nominating @sam-github and @jasnell as releasers #2416
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Comments
should have mentioned @nodejs/tsc for this one, sorry |
I'm happy to accept assuming their are no objections. GPG key can be found here: https://keybase.io/jasnell |
Sounds like a good plan. +1 |
👍 |
I'm happy to help out with releases, gpg keys at https://keybase.io/octetcloud |
I may need to add a new gpg key (likely my keybase one), I erased my old one when switching laptops. |
@chrisdickinson can you confirm https://keybase.io/chrisdickinson / I'll do this in a single PR. |
err, |
this was voted on by the TSC today and both additions got a +1 and there were no objections to the plan to mush together a release team for all branches |
Can this be closed then? Or is it also for this week's? |
waiting for feedback and signoff on #2455, I'll remove the label though |
Fixes: nodejs#2416 PR-URL: nodejs#2455 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Closing since #2455 landed. |
I'm proposing that we fully unify the release process for 0.10, 0.12, io.js, 4.x+ and LTS. Initially I thought that having separate groups for different concerns was the way to go but now I think that's over-optimising and we should just reduce friction and let people gravitate towards the release lines that they are more concerned with—if we have a big enough group of releasers then we should be covered. I also think our current procedures for getting sign-off via GitHub is suffice to stop any unwanted changes getting out into LTS & Maintainence where we need to take much more care.
Current status:
I propose that we:
Relevant docs on how it's currently handled:
Tagging this as
tsc-agenda
because it'll need formal sign-off. @sam-github and @jasnell may choose to decline, and all of this is up for discussion by collaborators as well of course.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: