Uploaded image for project: 'Data Management'
  1. Data Management
  2. DM-16397

Do release 17.0 of science pipelines

    Details

    • Type: Story
    • Status: Done
    • Resolution: Done
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: None
    • Team:
      Architecture
    • Urgent?:
      No

      Description

      Do release 17.0 of science pipelines

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            gcomoretto Gabriele Comoretto added a comment - - edited

            If we backport and then run all the standard checks,  this will generate a delay in the release of a few days

            I suggest including this fix in a subsequent patch release, that could be available by the end of the week or the beginning of next week.

            The DM-CCB need to approve any further delays to the 17.0 or a new patch release.

            Show
            gcomoretto Gabriele Comoretto added a comment - - edited If we backport and then run all the standard checks,  this will generate a delay in the release of a few days I suggest including this fix in a subsequent patch release, that could be available by the end of the week or the beginning of next week. The DM-CCB need to approve any further delays to the 17.0 or a new patch release.
            Hide
            ktl Kian-Tat Lim added a comment -

            Since we have no tests that exercise the code being modified (otherwise the problem would have been discovered earlier), I don't see why running "the standard checks" should be necessary.

            It seems to me that a 17.0 followed immediately by a 17.0.1 that we recommend everyone use instead will create more confusion, although perhaps it's good training for the user base.

            Show
            ktl Kian-Tat Lim added a comment - Since we have no tests that exercise the code being modified (otherwise the problem would have been discovered earlier), I don't see why running "the standard checks" should be necessary. It seems to me that a 17.0 followed immediately by a 17.0.1 that we recommend everyone use instead will create more confusion, although perhaps it's good training for the user base.
            Hide
            shupe David Shupe added a comment -

            Right, the standard checks do not exercise the lsst.display.firefly module.

            Operationally, the request is to apply the 17.0 tag to the 16.0-14-g377950a version of the display_firefly package, instead of the version that carries the 17.0rc2 tag. (I hope I am using "version" and "tag" correctly.)

            Show
            shupe David Shupe added a comment - Right, the standard checks do not exercise the lsst.display.firefly module. Operationally, the request is to apply the 17.0 tag to the 16.0-14-g377950a version of the  display_firefly package, instead of the version that carries the 17.0rc2 tag. (I hope I am using "version" and "tag" correctly.)
            Hide
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment -

            I am reluctant to further delay this release.  We cannot fix everything in a release and there will certainly be more bug fixes to follow.  I would prefer to make this release as planned and include this (and possibly other) bug fixes in a subsequent patch release.  

            Show
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment - I am reluctant to further delay this release.  We cannot fix everything in a release and there will certainly be more bug fixes to follow.  I would prefer to make this release as planned and include this (and possibly other) bug fixes in a subsequent patch release.  
            Hide
            womullan Wil O'Mullane added a comment -

            Please go ahead with this release. This release is holding up a test milestone - the bug will not prevent that test happening. We certainly have problem of monolithic releases where we should be releasing some components separately  - i.e. perhaps plugins could be separately released.  We can certainly do patch or minor release during normal DMCCB work.

            Show
            womullan Wil O'Mullane added a comment - Please go ahead with this release. This release is holding up a test milestone - the bug will not prevent that test happening. We certainly have problem of monolithic releases where we should be releasing some components separately  - i.e. perhaps plugins could be separately released.  We can certainly do patch or minor release during normal DMCCB work.

              People

              • Assignee:
                gcomoretto Gabriele Comoretto
                Reporter:
                gcomoretto Gabriele Comoretto
                Watchers:
                Colin Slater, David Shupe, Frossie Economou, Gabriele Comoretto, Gregory Dubois-Felsmann, John Parejko, John Swinbank, Joshua Hoblitt, Kian-Tat Lim, Leanne Guy, Simon Krughoff, Tim Jenness, Wil O'Mullane
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                13 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved:

                  Summary Panel