Align make target "release" with current practice and pitfalls

Observed behavior

Need to improve reliability of make release to ensure it correctly captures everything. Current instructions are out-dated

Add:

• Something about building on a clean environment
• Refuse to work if there are more than 2 items in dist/ – it doesn’t make sense ATM.
• Refuse to work if current git repo is unclean

Additionally while we’re at it:

• Add some echo’s to make dist because it’s impossible to see when it finishes one step and starts the next.

Release process documentation:

http://kolibri-dev.readthedocs.io/en/develop/references/release_process.html


Quick check list:

1. Release notes?
2. Downloaded CrowdIn translations?
3. Pushed CrowdIn translations to repo?
4. Version info as tag and in kolibri.VERSION?
5. Did you do a signed commit and push to Github?
6. Check that the .whl and .tar.gz dists work?

Do you want to upload everything in dist/*?

CTRL+C to exit. ENTER to continue.

Expected behavior

(will draft something else)

User-facing consequences

n/a

Errors and logs

Just had a problem with a release artifact that I built because of an unclean git repo with .lock files left dirty. Need to figure out what changes them (separate issue).

If the release command verified stuff, that would be better.

Steps to reproduce

make release (it’s harmless running it once)

Context

0.11 and subsequent patch releases.

[indirectlylit]

Yes the checklist is fine.

I’m just trying to flag that the less DRY our documentation gets, the more likely it is that things will get stale and out-of-date as our processes and system evolves.

[indirectlylit]

release process checklists are now tracked in https://github.com/learningequality/kolibri-release-process