Re: Glibc release check-list

[Roland McGrath <roland at redhat dot com>]

>   * Create tag glibc-2.M.N and push it out. (Or do we want to use
> release/2.M/2.M.N for tags as well? It seems a bit clumsy and tag for
> stable releases would be hard to find for glibc newbies, IMHO.)

Yes, the top-level tag names are fine.  Note this should be a git tag -s tag.

>   * Write up an announcement and send it to libc-alpha@ and
> libc-announce@. (BTW, no release announcements are sent there for a
> while now.)

When we've been coherent about it, we also posted them to info-gnu.

>   * Ask Carlos O'Donell <carlos@systemhalted.org> to update the homepage
> at gnu.org and sourceware.org.

Anyone who can be a release branch manager can also have the privs to do
this directly.  Of course, I'm not against volunteering Carlos. :-)

>   * Ask Alfred M. Szmidt <ams@gnu.org> to create and upload tarballs on
> ftp.gnu.org.

At least for 2.11 and on 'make dist' (i.e. git archive) makes them trivially.
Ideally a release manager should have actually tried out a tarball (used it
as source for an rpm build, etc.) to verify nothing has gone strangely awry.

For sourceware, it's just nice to have .sig files and having those
signatures made by the release branch manager makes as much sense as
anything.  For uploading to ftp.gnu.org, IIRC the file signatures have to
be by the key that signs the foo.directive.asc files and that has to be one
of the keys on the gnu.org list for glibc.  The actual uploading is done
via anonymous FTP, so if you have properly-signed files then that's all you
need.

I believe Alfred has a key on that list, and we know I do.  I don't see any
problem with having each release branch manager's key added to that list
too.  The gnu.org admins are not instantaneous about updating that stuff,
but they have not been too bad given an email request signed by me.  It's
also fine to punt the signing and uploading to Alfred if he is happy to do
it in a timely fashion.  But if release managers don't mind doing it
themselves, off hand it seems preferable for the file signatures to be made
by the release manager's key.


Thanks,
Roland