[Python-Dev] What is the rationale behind source only releases?

[Steve Dower]

On 17May2018 1004, Brett Cannon wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 17 May 2018 at 09:57 Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com
> <mailto:p.f.moore at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On 17 May 2018 at 14:42, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org
>     <mailto:brett at python.org>> wrote:
>     >
>     > If I understand things correctly, our planned migration to VSTS
>     will include
>     > eventually automating the signing of the Windows releases so that
>     part wont
>     > be an issue (which are currently signed manually be Steve).
> 
>     Somewhat off-topic for this discussion, but is there any background on
>     the "planned migration to VSTS" that I can go and read up on? I've
>     seen the comments on the committers mailing list and it looks cool,
>     but I got the impression it was an addition, rather than a migration.
>     (If it is just an additional CI service we'll be using, then no
>     worries - more is always better!)
> 
> 
> To be a bit more specific, it's "planned assuming the testing of VSTS
> works out as we expect it to". :) IOW it isn't definite quite yet, but I
> am not expecting any blockers or people objecting, so in my head I'm
> optimistic that it's going to happen. (Any more discussion can be
> brought up on core-workflow.)

I just posted another email, but it looks like it's working out :)

The migration hasn't really been planned as such, which is why so few
people have heard about it. I've just spent the PyCon US sprints proving
that it's a viable option to migrate to, and it can certainly help
relieve the burden on AppVeyor and Travis.

As Brett says, it'll be up to core-workflow as to whether we switch
completely and when.

On doing release builds through it, that is somewhat orthogonal. Right
now, the Windows build still requires using my secure VM, which doesn't
really let just anyone do the release, but we could easily get to a
point where specifically authorised people can produce a complete build.
Similarly, the macOS build probably shouldn't be done on the provided
(up-to-date) CI machine, as I believe that would impact our
compatibility. So perhaps having a well-powered and flexible build
service available will help, but no promises.

Cheers,
Steve