[Dev] Release candidate Feathercoin 0.9.6 checklist & final issues

Wellenreiter

For the Github code, I think, we don’t really need a official certificate, if we can apply a PGP key and use that to sign the code.

All the certificate stuff is about building trust, and that also can be archived through BGP and even through the forum here, If we show the fingerprints of your keys somewhere on the forum, maybe in our trailers, that are appended to the posts

Wellenreiter

I have one other task, that I would like to give to someone else:

check/update Linux manpages for feathercoind, feathercoin-qt and feathercoin-cli
- check, that no occurrences of ‘Bitcoin’ are in the man pages
- check overall usability of the man pages
- the page for feathercoin-cli needs to be created. That can be done by copying the content from feathercoind man page and modify it to mention feathercoin-cli

The man page files are on Github here

AcidD

~~I’ll sort out those man pages and do a pull request when I’m done.~~

@Wellenreiter PR sent -
https://github.com/FeatherCoin/Feathercoin/pull/153

wrapper

@Wellenreiter - These issues from Github can be signed off / completed. Mostly due to patches AFB and I did in 0.9.3.2./ 0.9.6 and Lizhi pulled in, to improve the user interface design and consistency.

Wallet main screen UI design / issue - Status Icons covered by frames
https://github.com/FeatherCoin/Feathercoin/issues/103
Interface work

The layout of the form for advanced feature : OpenNames
https://github.com/FeatherCoin/Feathercoin/issues/102
Interface work

Test fail --Transaction right click - Dropdown Bitmessage - Fails to operate
https://github.com/FeatherCoin/Feathercoin/issues/120
Documentation work

Test fail–Transaction right click - Dropdown Ubuntu 16.04
https://github.com/FeatherCoin/Feathercoin/issues/119
Sign off : Not Fixed in 0.9.6 : Raise issue to test Show Transaction Total is correct in 0.11 or further versions.

Test results - Create Stealth Address from the Button Receive Grid
https://github.com/FeatherCoin/Feathercoin/issues/121
Not being done - sign off

wrapper

travis.yml and automatic testing for FTC 0.9.6.

@Aciddude is looking into automatic testing. These are some notes, FTC possible ways forward / Bitcoin Litecoin status.

Bitcoin implemented / has a travis test file in version 0.10. Similar with Litecoin.

FTC is forked from Bitcoin, so it is proposed Bitcoin travis.yml be backported form Bitcoin 0.10 and tested for FTC compatibility / required changes to have 0.9.6 auto tested.

Notes:

Litcoin have made some slight modifications / fixes, so their version is worth studying.
There are later versions of the Bitcoin travis.yml in 0.11, 0.12 and 0.13

Bitcoin 0.10 travis.yml test file :
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/0.10/.travis.yml

Litecoin 0.10 travis.yml
https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/blob/0.10/.travis.yml

Latest Bitcoin travis.yml
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/.travis.yml

Wellenreiter

I would like to release 0.9.6 this week, so I suggest to freeze the 0.9.6 code and only improve the man pages and release notes.
We can either bring the new test capabilities in a version 0.9.7 or better implement them in 0.11.x
For 0.9.6 we can live with the manual testing

wrapper

Ok, I agree. FTC is ready to release. We’ve got a lot of further refinement we can quickly apply to 0.11. 0.9.6 is a significant update to 0.9.1.

I think it is expedient to create FTC 0.9.7-dev ,

Reason for 0.9.7-dev:

Copy / branch of code : Just prior to final release changes. Prevent / identify “rougue releases”
We may need to fix a bug (unlikely), but also can get travis working (nearly there), ready to accept and test any issues or further improvements to test.
Known testing ground for comparison with 0.11 in further developments
Gives FTC the possible to release “wallet fix versions” (i.e. new functionality review, possible remove shapeshift , etc) - that can be done with no fork issues.

Backport Branch

Suggestions for Development plan for 0.9.x branch

Feathercoin 0.9.7-dev
Implement Unit Test
Implement Auto build service
Collect issues From 0.9.6 release
Test fixes to issues
Move issue to Feathercoin 0.11-dev
Collect issues and release 0.9.8

AcidD

@wrapper @Wellenreiter - Agreed, +1 !

There’s quite a few files that would need to be pulled in for Travis-CI to work correctly. I’d like to spend time understanding these files instead of blindly pulling in from Bitcoin or Litecoin.

an easy example of what’s definitely going to break is zxing - so even if we got the build scripts for travis CI working, they wouldn’t include QR codes until we put in the necessary script/procedure for zxing.

pushing Travis-CI stuff to a later version of Feathercoin sounds like the right idea :)

AcidD

@wrapper said in [Dev] Release candidate Feathercoin 0.9.6 checklist & final issues:

Ok, I agree. FTC is ready to release. We’ve got a lot of further refinement we can quickly apply to 0.11. 0.9.6 is a significant update to 0.9.1.

I think it is expedient to create FTC 0.9.7-dev ,

Reason for 0.9.7-dev:

Copy / branch of code : Just prior to final release changes. Prevent / identify “rougue releases”

We may need to fix a bug (unlikely), but also can get travis working (nearly there), ready to accept and test any issues or further improvements to test.

Known testing ground for comparison with 0.11 in further developments

Gives FTC the possible to release “wallet fix versions” (i.e. new functionality review, possible remove shapeshift , etc) - that can be done with no fork issues.

Backport Branch

Sugestions for Development plan for 0.9.x branch

Feathercoin 0.9.7-dev
Implement Unit Test
Implement Auto build service
Collect issues From 0.9.6 release
Test fixes to issues
Move issue to Feathercoin 0.11-dev
Collect issues and release 0.9.8

This is a good idea.

Maybe create a post in the Admin/team area for now, just so that the version numbers dont confuse forum members. Once 0.9.6 is fully released as “production” - you could move the 0.9.7-dev topic to the public forums for discussion/in-put from the general feather public :-)

wrapper

@Aciddude I agree with your comments.

The probability is we will move all development to 0.11 and just the stub (0.9.7-dev), without the “release specific changes” will remain.

Hopefully most issues can be fixed in 0.11.

We can get a feel for how quickly 0.11 can be audited for release, will depend on the number of changes to bring across etc. Obviously, the quicker we can do that the less likely further developments in 0.9.x …