activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Bertram <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] release process improvements
Date Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:07:39 GMT
Perhaps this [1], Tim?



On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Timothy Bish <> wrote:

> On 09/12/2017 09:49 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>> I mentioned on the recent Artemis 2.3.0 vote that I had some suggested
>> changes for the release process improvements, not just for Artemis but
>> for other components too, and would send a mail later.
>> The short version is there are three main things I'd like to suggest
>> as improvements, both for folks testing+voting, and end users
>> downloading the release later:
>> - Using the dist dev repo for publishing bits for folks to test and vote
>> on.
>> - Providing checksum files in the dist repo which verify more easily
>> with the related tools.
>> - Use SHA512 rather than SHA1 for checksums in the dist repo.
>> # Dist dev repo for votes
>> Currently the ActiveMQ votes for the Java components tend to link to
>> the artifacts in the nexus staging repo. I think using the dist dev
>> repo ( to publish the
>> bits under vote would be an improvement. Its easy for folks to grab
>> all the files at once, helps ensure that what people test is actually
>> what will end up in the dist release repo later, and it simplifies the
>> eventual release step to a single svn remote copy command.
>> # Provide more easily verifiable checksum files in dist release repo
>> Currently, the checksum files provides in the dist release repo are
>> just the ones from nexus. These lack filename information and so you
>> cant verify them as easily with tools. Files which contain the
>> filename detail can be verified quickly and even grouped in a single
>> shot with the checksum tools, e.g "md5sum -c *.md5". For the MD5 and
>> SHA1 cases they could be prepared either by manipulating the existing
>> files taken from nexus to add the names, or simply generating the
>> checksums again with the tools and manually verifying them the same
>> way everyone currently needs to.
>> # Provide SHA512 checksum files in the dist repo
>> The release distribution policy has suggested using SHA512 for some
>> time now, I think it would be good to make the switch for the files
>> provided in the dist repo.
>> Robbie
>> +1
> I'd go ahead and suggest you start updating the release guide to reflect
> this process, the 5.x release guide is here:
> I haven't found if Artemis has anything similar, doesn't seem to be in the
> hacking guide.
> --
> Tim Bish
> twitter: @tabish121
> blog:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message