activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Timothy Bish <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] release process improvements
Date Fri, 15 Sep 2017 20:18:58 GMT
On 09/15/2017 03:59 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
> Just for my education. Why you Decided to drop downloading the .sha1 and
> are creating a new one?
> All the other downloads we have are using the .sha1?

As Robbie stated in the original message the Apache recommendation for 
signatures on the official release artifacts is a sha512 based 
signature, not the older sha1 that is used in the unofficial maven 
release artifacts.

Refer here:

> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 11:56 AM Robbie Gemmell <>
> wrote:
>> I tweaked the helper script to verify the downloaded tar/zip files
>> using their downloaded signature, then update the downloaded .md5 file
>> with filename info so it can verify easily with CLI tools, dropped
>> downloading the .sha1 and generated a new .sha512, and then at the end
>> verifies all the checksums as a sanity check (somewhat superfluous for
>> the SHA512, but doesn't hurt).
>> If folks are happy with this I can update the instructions at
>> to
>> reflect the slight process changes needed.
>> Robbie
>> On 14 September 2017 at 15:32, Clebert Suconic
>> <> wrote:
>>> I thought about checking the sum. Didn't have time.
>>> I would check the files created by nexus Instead of creating new ones
>>> thought.
>>> Feel free to tweak the script.  I will be out for a week.  I will just
>>> finish the release and I will be away for a week.
>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 5:48 AM Robbie Gemmell <
>>> wrote:
>>>> Script looks good, though I'd tweak it a little to cover the eased
>>>> checksum verification and supplying a SHA512 one (more below).
>>>> I agree that similar changes would be good for the ActiveMQ 5 releases
>>>> also, thats the main reason I didn't just detail things on the Artemis
>>>> 2.3.0 vote thread.
>>>> Back to the script, I'd suggest tweaking it to add a check that the
>>>> signature verifies to ensure the downloaded files are ok, then rather
>>>> than download the .sha1 I'd have it generate a .sha512 file instead,
>>>> and would similarly update/regenerate the .md5 file to embed filename
>>>> info so it verifies easily with the CLI tooling. E.g:
>>>>      gpg --verify $theFile.asc
>>>>      md5sum $theFile > $theFile.md5
>>>>      sha512sum $theFile > $theFile.sha512
>>>> Then testers and end users downloading the checksum files can just
>>>> verify them with the -c flags on the CLI tools, e.g you can check all
>>>> the checksums with just:
>>>>      md5sum -c *.md5
>>>>      sha512sum -c *.sha512
>>>> On 13 September 2017 at 23:36, Clebert Suconic
>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>> Ok, fair enough... I can see this as a process improvement.
>>>>> I wasn't just understanding what you were proposing clearly enough.
>>>>> I just added this script here:
>>>>> I didn't update the yet...
>>>>> I would add that during the release, you use the download-release from
>>>>> the staged mvn repo using that script into the dev area.
>>>>> The vote would have the staged download on dev, and we just make a
>>>>> simple copy from one place to the other.. and remove the previous
>>>>> thing.
>>>>> But I think this should be also done on ActiveMQ 5 releases.
>>>>> The thing that threw me of was when you mentioned extra work.. there's
>>>>> no extra work here :)
>>>>> It's actually saving me from screwing up eventually, so I take it as
>>>>> an improvement.
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, thats essentially what I mean and do, I have a txt file I keep
>>>>>> some comments in as notes, and can source as a script to download
>>>>>> various tars and signatures from nexus (though it could equally pull
>>>>>> them from the maven local repo, verifying the Nexus ones is good
>>>>>> think), verify the signature, and generate new MD5+SHA512 checksum
>>>>>> files that include the filename details (it could instead manipualte
>>>>>> the MD5 one rather than create new). I execute that in a directory
>>>>>> within a checkout of the dist dev, then commit the files after a
>>>>>> little validation and open the vote.
>>>>>> The process of putting the files in the dist dev area is mostly the
>>>>>> same as what will be getting done now for the final release, it just
>>>>>> uses a different subtree of the same parent dist svn repo, so for
>>>>>> example you would use a subdir of
>>>>>> before the vote rather than of
>>>>>> after the vote.
>>>>>> To complete the example, had the files for the recent Artemis 2.3.0
>>>>>> vote been in the dist dev area already you would just do something
>>>>>> like this to complete the release once the vote had passed:
>>>>>> svn cp -m "add files for activemq-artemis-2.3.0"
>>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>> On 13 September 2017 at 17:52, Clebert Suconic
>>>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>>>> I actually see how to make the copy into dev... let me play with
>> a
>>>>>>> little bit....
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>>>>> what about this:
>>>>>>>> Currently mvn release and mvn upload will always send the
>> to
>>>> nexus,
>>>>>>>> So what about:
>>>>>>>> - we provide an script to artemis to download the correct
bits of
>> the
>>>>>>>> release, the release manager would use that script to perform
>>>>>>>> download.
>>>>>>>> - The release manager would place it on the dev repository
>> is
>>>>>>>> mentioning... (that means.. we wouldn't really have an extra
>>>>>>>> On thing I'm not sure how to do is... how to upload it to
the dev
>> dist
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> and how we would make the final move? just a regular copy?
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Robbie Gemmell
>>>>>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 13 September 2017 at 14:35, Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:21 AM Robbie Gemmell <
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> This was less about time, though there is some
benefit in that
>>>> regard,
>>>>>>>>>>> with how much depending on how particular people
actually verify
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> checksums I guess.
>>>>>>>>>> Actually this is kind of moot. nexus does that check
for you.
>> You
>>>> cannot
>>>>>>>>>> upload a release with a checksum broken. It won't
let you close.
>>>>>>>>>> Like. Last week I had to restart the release once
because MVN
>>>> upload broke
>>>>>>>>>> the checksum somewhere.
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>> Whether the files in Nexus are ok isn't sufficient. The
>> and
>>>>>>>>> checksum files in the dist repo are the mirrorer official
>>>>>>>>> artifacts (and strictly only the source ones at that),
and Nexus
>> cant
>>>>>>>>> check those. There could be a problem deploying those
bits for a
>>>>>>>>> variety of reasons, so we check they are ok. Users downloading
>>>>>>>>> release archives also tend to grab the checksums from
the dist
>> repo
>>>>>>>>> because that is their official source, in order to verify
>> downloads

Tim Bish
twitter: @tabish121

View raw message