Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

doc: copyedit releases.md #4384

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

Trott
Copy link
Member

@Trott Trott commented Dec 22, 2015

No description provided.

@Trott Trott added the doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. label Dec 22, 2015
@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Dec 22, 2015

LGTM


**b.** Log in to the server via SSH and check for releases that can be promoted, along with the list of artifacts. It will use the `dist-promotable` command on the server to find these. You will be asked, for each promotable release, whether you want to proceed. If there is more than one release to promote (there shouldn't be), be sure to only promote the release you are responsible for.

**c.** Log in to the server via SSH and run the promote script for the given release. The command on the server will be similar to: `dist-promote vx.y.z`. After this step, the release artifacts will be available for download and a SHASUMS256.txt file will be present. The release will still be unsigned, however.

**d.** Download SHASUMS256.txt to your computer using SCP into a temporary directory.
**d.** Use SCP to download SHASUMS256.txt to a temporary directory on your computer.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

s/SCP/scp/?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In general, I believe SCP is used for the protocol and scp for the command, similar to SSH vs. ssh. I'm fine with either here. No strong feelings either way.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the intention was for it to refer to the command, if you do it as scp it should be clear

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK, SCP -> scp fixup pushed.

@bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member

LGTM

1 similar comment
@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Dec 22, 2015

LGTM

@rvagg
Copy link
Member

rvagg commented Dec 23, 2015

Changes lgtm, thanks for the effort here @Trott.

The doc is still out of date though, I'd love to go through and update it but I'm not sure I'll be able to find the time for a while. If any of the @nodejs/release team who have done a release recently want to have a go it'd be greatly appreciated. There are some things that stand out immediately:

  • iojs+release options have expanded and need explaining
  • tools/release.sh has a -s argument that can be used to re-sign a build where the signing failed for some reason, I don't think that's mentioned in there
  • details on how to publish a blog post
  • the extra descriptors we put in summaries, tags and other places now: "(Stable)", "(LTS)", "(Maintenance)"
  • having a PR-URL for a commit message is preferred
  • does it mention that you should push your -proposal branch to this repo so others in the release team can take over? that feels like a more recent evolution of our process.

I'm sure there are other things.

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Dec 23, 2015

@rvagg Safe for me to interpret your comment as a wish list of updates you'd like to see someone do soon if someone knowledgable can get to it, but no reason to refrain from merging the changes that are here at this time?

@rvagg
Copy link
Member

rvagg commented Dec 24, 2015

@Trott yes, that's correct, this lgtm as is for a simple copyedit, great job.

Trott added a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request Dec 24, 2015
PR-URL: nodejs#4384
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Dec 24, 2015

Landed in b094402

@Trott Trott closed this Dec 24, 2015
Trott added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 30, 2015
PR-URL: #4384
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Fishrock123 pushed a commit to Fishrock123/node that referenced this pull request Jan 6, 2016
PR-URL: nodejs#4384
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 19, 2016
PR-URL: #4384
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Jan 19, 2016
scovetta pushed a commit to scovetta/node that referenced this pull request Apr 2, 2016
PR-URL: nodejs#4384
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
@Trott Trott deleted the releases-copyedit branch January 13, 2022 22:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants