skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: A self-referential HOWTO on release engineering

Abstract

Release engineering is a fundamental part of the software development cycle: it is the point at which quality control is exercised and bug fixes are integrated. The way in which software is released also gives the end user her first experience of a software package, while in scientific computing release engineering can guarantee reproducibility. For these reasons and others, the release process is a good indicator of the maturity and organization of a development team. Software teams often do not put in place a release process at the beginning. This is unfortunate because the team does not have early and continuous execution of test suites, and it does not exercise the software in the same conditions as the end users. I describe an approach to release engineering based on the software tools developed and used by the GNU project, together with several specific proposals related to packaging and distribution. I do this in a step-by-step manner, demonstrating how this very paper is written and built using proper release engineering methods. Because many aspects of release engineering are not exercised in the building of the paper, the accompanying software repository also contains examples of software libraries.

Authors:
 [1]
  1. Los Alamos National Lab. (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Los Alamos National Lab. (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1419718
Report Number(s):
LA-UR-14-21151
DOE Contract Number:
AC52-06NA25396
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
42 ENGINEERING; 97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING; Computer Science; software engineering release engineering

Citation Formats

Galassi, Mark C. A self-referential HOWTO on release engineering. United States: N. p., 2018. Web. doi:10.2172/1419718.
Galassi, Mark C. A self-referential HOWTO on release engineering. United States. doi:10.2172/1419718.
Galassi, Mark C. 2018. "A self-referential HOWTO on release engineering". United States. doi:10.2172/1419718. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1419718.
@article{osti_1419718,
title = {A self-referential HOWTO on release engineering},
author = {Galassi, Mark C.},
abstractNote = {Release engineering is a fundamental part of the software development cycle: it is the point at which quality control is exercised and bug fixes are integrated. The way in which software is released also gives the end user her first experience of a software package, while in scientific computing release engineering can guarantee reproducibility. For these reasons and others, the release process is a good indicator of the maturity and organization of a development team. Software teams often do not put in place a release process at the beginning. This is unfortunate because the team does not have early and continuous execution of test suites, and it does not exercise the software in the same conditions as the end users. I describe an approach to release engineering based on the software tools developed and used by the GNU project, together with several specific proposals related to packaging and distribution. I do this in a step-by-step manner, demonstrating how this very paper is written and built using proper release engineering methods. Because many aspects of release engineering are not exercised in the building of the paper, the accompanying software repository also contains examples of software libraries.},
doi = {10.2172/1419718},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2018,
month = 1
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • The results of an investigation of human factors engineering and human reliability applications to LNG release prevention and control are reported. The report includes a discussion of possible human error contributions to previous LNG accidents and incidents, and a discussion of generic HF considerations for peakshaving plants. More specific recommendations for improving HF practices at peakshaving plants are offered based on visits to six facilities. The HF aspects of the recently promulgated DOT regulations are reviewed, and recommendations are made concerning how these regulations can be implemented utilizing standard HF practices. Finally, the integration of HF considerations into overall systemmore » safety is illustrated by a presentation of human error probabilities applicable to LNG operations and by an expanded fault tree analysis which explicitly recognizes man-machine interfaces.« less
  • The effects of atmospheric pressure variation on the flow velocity, water vapor transport, and oxygen depletion within a hypothetical low-level engineered waste facility were recently modeled with a set of engineering assumptions. The model that resulted from these activates is termed {open_quotes}GETAR{close_quote} for gas evolution, transport and reaction. Results of transport calculations show that the pumping effect of barometric pressure changes is the dominant mechanism for inducing the release of carbon-14 in a facility with a monitoring well. Coupled with this calculation, are recent results that indicate that a greater fraction of the carbon-14 within a hypothetical waste facility wouldmore » be available for biodegradation and release via an airborne pathway rather than into groundwater.« less
  • The US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5400.5, ``Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment'' contains provisions pertinent to releasing potentially radioactive materials from DOE facilities for reuse or recycle. A process of authorized release for materials recovered from radiation areas is permitted under Order 5400.5 and the proposed rule in Title 10, Part 834, of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 834). A generic disposition protocol to facilitate release of concrete under these provisions has been developed. This report analyzes the application of that generic protocol to site-specific cases at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratorymore » (INEEL). The potential radiological doses and costs for several concrete disposition alternatives for the sewage treatment plant (STP) at the Central Facilities Area (CFA) of INEEL were evaluated in this analysis. Five disposition alternatives were analyzed for the concrete: (A) decontaminate, crush, and reuse; (B) crush and reuse without decontamination; (C) decontaminate, demolish, and dispose of at a nonradiological landfill; (D) demolish and dispose of at a nonradiological landfill without decontamination; and (E) demolish and dispose of at a low-level radioactive waste (LLW) facility. The analysis was performed for disposition of concrete from four INEEL structures: (1) trickle filter, (2) primary clarifier, (3) secondary clarifier, and (4) CFA-691 pumphouse for a generic case (based on default parameters from the disposition protocol) and an INEEL-specific case (based on INEEL-specific parameters). The results of the analysis indicated that Alternatives B and D would incur the lowest cost and result in a dose less than 1 mrem/yr (except for the trickle filter, the dose for which was estimated at 1.9 mrem/yr) for nonradiological workers. The analysis indicated that the main contributor to the radiological dose would be cobalt-60 contamination in the concrete. A characterization conducted in 1996 was used in the analysis; therefore, because of radioactive decay, the resultant doses to receptors (now or later) would be less than the values reported in this analysis. For the generic case study, costs associated with Alternatives A and C were shown to be much smaller than for Alternative E. For the INEEL-specific case, in general, costs were much higher for Alternatives A and C than for Alternative E because of on-site disposal with zero disposal cost.« less