Re: [Board] Roadmap and Release schedule for Plone 5.2 and 6.0

--===============8650186905025328235==
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
 boundary="Apple-Mail=_B32969F1-6EB5-4055-9413-63F28EDF440D";
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512


--Apple-Mail=_B32969F1-6EB5-4055-9413-63F28EDF440D
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8

Sorry for missing the meeting - timezones oh my!

Yesterday I ported a Plone site from Plone 4.3 with Archetypes and =
LinguaPlone to Plone 5.2 on Python 3.7. The hardest part was getting rid =
of Archetypes and LinguaPlone. If your DB never had Archetypes and =
LinguaPlone it's probably much easier.

The migration from AT to DX and from py2 to py3 were rather easy but the =
DB-Migration documentation is still terrible. I'll try to improve on the =
docs a little tomorrow

I think having a rc1 release (ideally with the pinns from Zope 4.0b10) =
before the sprint on Thursday would be much better because it is a lot =
harder to run your own projects against the coredev than simply update =
to a released version.

Philip

> Am 10.03.2019 um 19:36 schrieb T. Kim Nguyen <nguyen-z4DKO/[email protected]>:
>=20
> Notes from today=E2=80=99s meeting (Eric, Paul, me): =
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1u_brtRx3lmw6-RORncZDJ59p_1bHaQEUENFb91=
K5l24/edit#heading=3Dh.dbhfacl9z6ps
>=20
> In short: we are ready for the testing sprint on March 14; I will post =
the roadmap and update and publicize the testing sprint announcement.
>=20
> 	Kim
>=20
>> On Mar 4, 2019, at 4:11 PM, T. Kim Nguyen <nguyen-z4DKO/[email protected]> wrote:
>>=20
>> =
https://community.plone.org/t/plone-5-2-release-testing-day-coming-up-marc=
h-14-2019-py-day/8164
>>=20
>> My message to one of the above mailing lists got held for approval =
and maybe was rejected too.
>>=20
>> (Ah, ok, re-sent using my plone.org account)
>>=20
>> 	Kim
>>=20
>>> On Mar 4, 2019, at 3:57 PM, T. Kim Nguyen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> Hi Gil - community involvement is indeed a major component of this =
release plan! It tries to address the circular problem of people not =
testing until the release is out, and of not feeling comfortable making =
a release without sufficient testing.
>>>=20
>>> Now that you mention it, I can start pre-pushing that message out to =
the forum, so people are aware this is what we will be asking them to do =
(help testing).
>>>=20
>>> 	Kim
>>>=20
>>>> On Mar 4, 2019, at 3:49 PM, Gil Forcada Codinachs =
<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>=20
>>>> When this rc1 is out, if we want to make more people test it, it =
might be a good idea to state clearly, in bold, uppercase and whatnot, =
that it is indeed rc, so no breaking features, no PLIP, etc will be =
added later. We have a good track of doing so, which also might have =
helped on creating this scenario.
>>>>=20
>>>> =46rom a community/marketing/board point of view, it might be a =
good idea to promote this final stage testing by making a sort of sane =
competition, on who reports/fixes more issues etc and win some dummy =
prizes to be awarded at the Conference in Ferrara to help push the final =
release, or if a company is heavily involved, to get a spotlight =
somewhere/reduce fees etc etc.
>>>>=20
>>>> Which, also retrofitting, if we want the community to get more =
involved, we should involve them from the very beginning not as an after =
though when all decisions are made. One thing is doing marketing and for =
that you need some strategy, ideas and a focused group of people to do =
the job, but if we want to get the community involved in testing and =
ensuring that we can get 5.2 is out, we have to be open and vocal on =
that.
>>>>=20
>>>> At least, by doing so, if we are open from the very beginning, we =
can at least point to all the community.plone.org messages and call for =
actions, that no one should complain about the final 5.2 status because =
we gave them enough time.
>>>>=20
>>>> Which, IMHO, should be with the roadmap.
>>>>=20
>>>> But then again, that's my 0.2 cents.
>>>>=20
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Gil
>>>>=20
>>>> Missatge de Philip Bauer <[email protected]> del dia dl., 4 de mar=C3=A7=
 2019 a les 15:54:
>>>> Hi Teams!
>>>>=20
>>>> We discussed the whole thing in a hangout and reached a consensus.
>>>>=20
>>>> Here's what we decided:
>>>>=20
>>>> - We will release Plone 5.2rc1 this week
>>>> - We will publish the roadmap =
(https://docs.google.com/document/d/1u_brtRx3lmw6-RORncZDJ59p_1bHaQEUENFb9=
1K5l24) after some polishing this week. It is as usual not a law but a =
condensed version of the ongoing discussion in the Plone community.
>>>> - We will invite all developers to a remote sprint on March 14 to =
test and improve the Database-Migration documented in =
https://github.com/plone/documentation/blob/5.2/manage/upgrading/version_s=
pecific_migration/upgrade_to_python3.rst#database-migration
>>>> - We will release Plone 5.2 final on March 30. The release-notes =
for 5.2 may state (depending on the outcome of the above sprint) that =
the Database-Migration von Python 2 to 3 may be not as stable as we'd =
like them to be and that consecutive bugfix releases will address =
possible issues.
>>>> - We will form a group from all teams to plan the release. It will =
have a weekly hangout to coordinate and track progress. That will also =
give us a forum to postpone the release if a real blocker may come up.
>>>>=20
>>>> I'll personally try my best to test the Migration, work on the =
Upgrade-Guide (already started this morning) and update the Mastering =
Plone Training. If anyone has any issues either with missing docs, =
broken features or such please create a ticket of contact me.
>>>>=20
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Philip
>>>>=20
>>>> --
>>>> Starzel.de
>>>> Philip Bauer
>>>> Dilsberger Stra=C3=9Fe 9
>>>> 81245 M=C3=BCnchen
>>>> Tel: 089 - 189 29 533
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> www.starzel.de
>>>>=20
>>>> > Am 01.03.2019 um 11:06 schrieb Gil Forcada Codinachs =
<[email protected]>:
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi all,
>>>> >
>>>> > as for the "until a final release is made nobody tests it" I have =
a solution: let's wrap up the blockers for 5.2, make it final AND =
CLEARLY LABEL that:
>>>> > - it is ONLY meant for new projects (i.e. migrations are still =
not 100% guaranteed)
>>>> > - for BRAVE souls that want to try Python 3
>>>> > - fine and dandy for python 2 projects
>>>> >
>>>> > And now the marketing twist on it: see that the release will be =
5.2 ? When the migration/documentation/translations are on a better =
shape, let's release that as 5.3 because it will be supporting python 3 =
just fine (I guess the marketing team will have plenty of better ideas, =
but I came up with that while reading these mails :D).
>>>> >
>>>> > With my release team hat on: in the last month 2 PLIPs have been =
merged (faster navigation and redirects control panel), which I have =
seen quite a few follow up pull requests these last weeks, i.e. they =
don't feel rock stable. On that same vein the i18n controlpanel =
interface move from CMFPlone to plone.i18n is missing an upgrade step =
(see =
https://github.com/plone/Products.CMFPlone/pull/2769#issuecomment-46633563=
6)
>>>> >
>>>> > I admire and wholeheartedly support all the effort you all put in =
porting the code and trying to keep up with keeping Jenkins happy, but =
at the same time I can not feel comfortable making a release if we are =
merging PLIPs and pull requests right and left without taking the extra =
time to ensure all pieces are in place.
>>>> >
>>>> > There are plenty of organizations that make odd releases as =
unstable and even releases as stable. For quite a while we have labeled =
4.3 as a LTS release (we are already on 4.3.18!) so, as said above I =
would be fine having 5.2 out as a final release but with a TP =
(Technology Preview) or whatever label.
>>>> >
>>>> > This way we have the best of both worlds:
>>>> > - the release is out and integrators can start their migration =
projects (even though they could have done that before anyway with a =
rc/beta/alpha...)
>>>> > - we clearly communicate that rough edges are still ahead
>>>> >
>>>> > As for keeping the peace with making frequent releases, on the =
release team we had a calendar to try to schedule 5.1/5.0/4.3 releases. =
We can try to aim for a monthly release of 5.2 if no major surprises are =
ahead but mostly bugfixes. On that front, we have a bus factor to make =
final releases as only the release manager is able to push to =
dist.plone.org.
>>>> >
>>>> > The sysadmin team told us that with the new infra being set up =
all the release team members will be able to push to dist.plone.org, so =
if we can make that happen, we will be able to increase the release =
frequency, and finally wish nice vacations to the release manager while =
the other release team members handle releases.
>>>> >
>>>> > As for 6.0, in general I'm against roadmaps that are being =
discussed by 2, 3 people and then thrown over the wall. What's the =
urgency of having a 6.0 roadmap if we still haven't finished not only =
5.2 but specially all the database migration problems? I get the idea of =
promising a bright future with super cool frontends, tune up backends =
and adapters everywhere, but that can easily backfire (and it has =
already happened, hello from Plone 5.0!) specially if you are adding =
dates to those promises...
>>>> >
>>>> > Sorry if it feels stop energy, I hope only this last 6.0 =
paragraph, I provided a few options for 5.2, but that's my 0.2 cents on =
the matter :-)
>>>> >
>>>> > Side note: as soon as/before we release 5.2, please communicate =
in advance if someone jumps and creates a 6.0/5.3 branch of =
buildout.coredev/cmfplone and expects that mr.roboto/jenkins and all the =
integrations are in place. AFAIK this is a release manager decision. I'm =
not against it, just that I (or whoever wants to help) need to adjust =
quite a few variables here and there and deploy new jenkins jobs and =
what not.
>>>> >
>>>> > Cheers,
>>>> > Gil
>>>> >
>>>> > Missatge de Philip Bauer <[email protected]> del dia dv., 1 de =
mar=C3=A7 2019 a les 9:17:
>>>> > Good Morning!
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm aware that is not my place to decide and that we need to =
agree on a release-date. But unsurprisingly I disagree. I've stated =
multiple times over the last year that a release-date of 5.2 early in =
2019 is critical. We were aiming for February, so we're already is month =
late with the proposed date of 30.03.2019.
>>>> >
>>>> > The reasoning behind a early release is not new: The Plone =
community suffers from a severe case of hen-and-egg syndrome. Until a =
final version is released nobody tests that new version. And once it is =
released people complain that it was not tested properly. The only way =
out of that is to release early and follow-up with bugfix-release as =
soon as serious issues are found and fixed.
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm certain that postponing the release by two month would not =
lead to more testing. Why should people start testing migrations now =
when they have not done it between November and now? Most people will =
only test it when the release is out.
>>>> >
>>>> > But with 5.2 we have even greater urgency. There are people and =
organizations who are required to move to Python 3 by 1.1.2020. Giving =
them as much of a head-start as possible by release 5.2 by the end of =
march seems critical to me.
>>>> >
>>>> > We urged time and time again that people should start planning =
and testing their migrations to 5.2 and Python 3 asap. We tried to make =
it as easy as possible and much more accessible that ever before:
>>>> >
>>>> > * We created a nightly demo-buld of 5.2 coredev that was online =
since May 2018 (http://demo-latest-py3.plone.org and =
http://demo-latest-py2.plone.org)
>>>> > * We documented how to test 5.2 in various Python versions.
>>>> > * We documented the migration to Python 3 in detail =
(https://tinyurl.com/plonepy3).
>>>> >
>>>> > There are still many things to do as Paul mentioned:
>>>> >
>>>> > * Translations need to be updated. English and German seems ok, =
others less so.
>>>> > * The migration-guide from 5.1 to 5.2 needs some work. I'm on it.
>>>> > * The porting-guide seems in a good state already.
>>>> > * The Installers need to be updated.
>>>> > * Marketing-Material and Newsitems needs to be prepared. The =
document that Timo and I started could to help with that =
(https://docs.google.com/document/d/1u_brtRx3lmw6-RORncZDJ59p_1bHaQEUENFb9=
1K5l24)
>>>> > * Parts of the documentation need to be updated.
>>>> >
>>>> > None of this is a surprise. I don't see what should stop us from =
finishing these tasks in time for March 30th. We should get our shit =
together and do it.
>>>> >
>>>> > Philip
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > > Am 01.03.2019 um 06:31 schrieb sven <[email protected]>:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Hi !
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Same here, well said !
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I am only talking here about the documentation part, the =
current state of the docs for 5.2 and 6 is far away from publishing.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Also, since we are on it, I would like to ask where I can find =
docs of Plone 6, like the new UI, etc.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > We started to rewrite and rebuild the whole docs from scratch, =
so far this is working well and the quality, readability, etc improved a =
lot.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > But since we have no idea what of the current docs will stay =
and which parts will be different we just have some basic covered, yet.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Please let us know (Open an issue) about docs of Plone 6.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > The same goes with with things like bobtemplates, will they =
worl with Plone 6, should we adjust or remove them from the 'core' docs =
?
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Thanks !
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Thu, 2019-02-28 at 22:20 +0100, Paul Roeland wrote:
>>>> > >> hi people,
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> although it's not the role of the Board to direct the =
technical direction of Plone, I do want to signal that I have serious =
concerns about the proposed timeline for 5.2.
>>>> > >> Not only as a member of the Board, which has to keep an eye =
out for marketing, but also as member of the documentation team.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> I think one month between having a RC1 and a final is way too =
short. There is still a lot of polishing to be done, in (at least) the =
areas of
>>>> > >>      =E2=80=A2 documentation
>>>> > >>      =E2=80=A2 translations
>>>> > >>      =E2=80=A2 real-world testing of migrations to Python3
>>>> > >>      =E2=80=A2 development of installers that work for both =
Python2 and Python3
>>>> > >>      =E2=80=A2 ... and probably more
>>>> > >> One of the criticisms that were uttered (not always in the =
nicest way, but that's beside the point) is that we should do better at =
Quality Assurance. That is also a marketing issue.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> So, while I fully support the idea of an ambitious to =
aggressive timeline, and also that we should reach RC status (meaning no =
more new features), I would strongly plead for more time, and a few RC =
releases. And then do a final around, let's say, June 1.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> 5.2 is an important release; it has been argued that in terms =
of effect it could have been a major release. Then, by all means, let's =
take it serious enough so that we have satisfactory translations, =
documentation, marketing messages, and a reasonably battle-tested =
migration experience before we call it a Final.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Paul Roeland
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> (Note: I'm only arguing urgently for a slowdown on the 5.2 =
release schedule. I like the ambition on the 6.0 schedule, although also =
there I think we're going to need a longer polishing time to make sure =
that we release with good translations, documentation, installing =
instructions and the like. In general we just need some time between =
feature-freeze and a good Quality-Assured release, with ribbons and =
glitter around it)
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 12:39 PM Philip Bauer =
<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>> Release-Schedule:
>>>> > >>> - rc1 next week
>>>> > >>> - final: 30.03.2019
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >> _______________________________________________
>>>> > >> Plone-installers mailing list
>>>> > >> Plone-installers-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-installers
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>>=20
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Plone-installers mailing list
>>>> Plone-installers-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-installers
>>>=20
>>=20
>=20
>=20


--Apple-Mail=_B32969F1-6EB5-4055-9413-63F28EDF440D
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEGein1j2gAsjPnuVzzTYF7i2evOkFAlyFYyAACgkQzTYF7i2e
vOlYeAf9FJYniUTTNVMioPuwPFD6sWKM0MU3mDwmia/yBKipWRMSYwYckhy4bU2r
992Orlg025e29vLpYHZFAbjcwtK0bd+CSvVAF/Sw2R2GACcxHFZdoxOV0wi2FP+y
67J/Ncisn9BeYfnliO+/hbkC1CLbeyd6KAJxTmA17eiH59+AWycitZfshjePZWJt
AoqcE9XXcbPCSJj+KhHzgPs+mVuCL9OkzspHIY9y7VoNzwC7rqjOdg5gU8jpMUVV
86sOQW6HYZMJYQDyeMBB0Rbpz7WlN3lrHOQ/IaMvedkHK/D8s9ARyWw4kiaXGZv/
hKKEQmgFGY1RFudmUZpH3XbkQw5Fpg==
=dz2b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_B32969F1-6EB5-4055-9413-63F28EDF440D--


--===============8650186905025328235==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline


--===============8650186905025328235==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Plone-installers mailing list
Plone-installers-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-installers

--===============8650186905025328235==--