Skip to content

Add birds-eye view of open PRs to release checklist #7198

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add birds-eye view of open PRs to release checklist #7198

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
1b2831c
Add birds-eye view of open PRs to release checklist
sffc Oct 29, 2025
f3665ec
Review feedback
sffc Oct 29, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions documents/process/release.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ This is a checklist of things that should be done in the weeks leading to the re
* [ ] Verify that the milestone and checklist are complete
* [ ] Verify with component owners that they're ready for release
* [ ] Verify that the semver breakages (listed by the build-test job) are acceptable
* [ ] A week before the planned release, go through each open PR and consult with the author to decide the timeline for landing it and whether it should make the release. PRs in draft status or with a "waiting-on-author" label can be skipped.
Copy link
Member

@Manishearth Manishearth Oct 29, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"new" open PR, for some definition of new. Probably "opened in the last two months" is sufficient.

We have 40 open PRs, that is a lot.

Copy link
Member

@Manishearth Manishearth Oct 29, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I actually think waiting-on-author is fair game for consideration but we can be conservative here.

Zibi's PR was waiting on author last week I think, though it wasn't tagged as such (we don't use that label consistently for team members)

Copy link
Member Author

@sffc sffc Oct 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I didn't say "new" open PR because I think even if a PR is several months old, it should either be merged, closed, converted to draft, or labeled with waiting-on-author. If those statuses aren't enough, we should add more.

Copy link
Member

@robertbastian robertbastian Oct 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Anything that is not a new PR should have been part of the TC milestone planning

Copy link
Member Author

@sffc sffc Oct 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The waiting-on-author label is something we stick on PRs that have been waiting for more than a ~week for the author to reply to reviewer feedback.

Copy link
Member

@robertbastian robertbastian Oct 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We did actually check PRs before the release, we included #7186 because it was very obvious. I think Manish and I both did not consider host_info blocking given that it was not part of the milestone.

Copy link
Member Author

@sffc sffc Oct 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do you have a suggestion on how to encode mid-cycle prerequisites, things like triaging issues and PRs and compiling a changelog as we go?

Copy link
Member

@Manishearth Manishearth Oct 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, I will note that this policy would not have helped with the hostinfo situation. Zibi had made it somewhat clear earlier that he didn't have a strict timeline for it, and we had explicitly discussed that it may or may not make the actual release (which is fine since it's a util!). As release driver I was aware of this PR, but I did not know of any reason to try and get it out for the release, based on explicit discussions we had already had. The desire to advertise it as a part of the release was only brought to my attention later.

I generally think a "check the open PRs" step is useful as a part of release management, but it wouldn't have helped here. The failure was earlier in the process.

Copy link
Member Author

@sffc sffc Oct 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I acknowledge that this wouldn't have much impact on host info.

Copy link
Member

@Manishearth Manishearth Oct 30, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@sffc I don't know! It's an "unfunded mandate", we could do something like having a checklist issue filed each month (each two months?), but then who would it be assigned to? (It being an unfunded mandate is precisely why I'm wary of making this bottom out to being the release drivers' problem)

Right now we do it haphazardly: we sometimes do this during meetings, and sometimes the two of us do triage. I also occasionally do stuff myself but usually my focus is the upcoming release milestone (regardless of whether I am release driver).

For the changelog, specifically, I have filed #7154 and there are ideas there. Making it a per-PR responsibility ought to help.

* [ ] Take a bird-eye view at:
* [ ] READMEs
* [ ] Documentation
Expand Down