ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicolas Lalevée <nicolas.lale...@hibnet.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Ivy 2.4.0 Release - take 2
Date Wed, 17 Dec 2014 22:15:30 GMT
Yes, it is already in the last attempt.

Nicolas

> Le 17 déc. 2014 à 22:56, antoine@gmx.de a écrit :
> 
> Hi I think the bintray resolver is part of the future release.
> 
> Antoine Levy-Lambert
> 
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "JBaruch" <jbaruch@jfrog.com>
> To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
> Subject: [VOTE] Ivy 2.4.0 Release - take 2
> Date: Wed, Dec 17, 2014 3:47 PM
> 
> Sorry to nag here, but any chance you can sneak the bintray resolver in?
> Now, when it has documentation and everything?
> Pretty please?
> 
> Baruch.
> 
> --
> JFrog Developer Advocate
> www.jfrog.com
> +972544954353
> @jbaruch <https://twitter.com/jbaruch/>
> http://linkd.in/jbaruch
> 
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 5:25 AM, Nicolas Lalevée <nicolas.lalevee@hibnet.org
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> Le 17 déc. 2014 à 04:09, Antoine Levy Lambert <antoine@gmx.de> a écrit
:
>>> 
>>> Nicolas, Jean-Louis, what are your thoughts ?
>>> 
>>> The problem reported by Stefan with the ivy.xml in the source archive
>> must be caused by something in the build process replacing the ivy.xml of
>> the source tree with an expanded version of the same file generated when
>> the <ivy:publish/> task runs ?
>> 
>> The purpose of this change is that it fixes the dependencies of Ivy. I see
>> no particular harm here.
>> 
>> But as Stefan, generally speaking, I prefer the source release to be an
>> extract of the source repository. So there is no possible confusion.
>> 
>>> I guess a minor edit in the build file to make this modified version of
>> ivy.xml go somewhere under the build folder should address this issue for
>> this release and the next ones.
>>> 
>>> I have not spent myself a lot of time on ivy yet but I would like to
>> spend some in 2015 - or maybe even next week if my kids are busy out of the
>> house …
>>> 
>>> I also know how it feels when one creates a release candidate and some
>> minor problems are found and one has to again go through 20 steps in a
>> ReleaseInstructions document …
>> 
>> Actually releasing Ivy is quite straight forward, no issues with that.
>> See: http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/trunk/dev/makerelease.html <
>> http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/trunk/dev/makerelease.html>
>> Probably the signing of the artifacts can be more automatic. I have seen
>> there is ant target for that but I haven’t tested it yet.
>> 
>> What trouble me more is what is the exact process to push artifacts into
>> Maven repo after the release. And we’ll need to figure out how to push it
>> into the Eclipse updatesite too.
>> 
>>> But I am sure we will get there finally.
>> 
>> I am sure too. We have to either be patient or actively act on it,
>> depending on our available time.
>> 
>>> On Dec 14, 2014, at 5:43 AM, Stefan Bodewig <bodewig@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> We should be using signed tags (git tag -s or -u) rather than
>>>> lightweight tags for releases.  I know we haven't cut any releases from
>>>> git so far, so we'll be learning as we go along.
>> 
>> I do not know how it works, but I’ll figure it out. And update the release
>> documentation.
>> 
>> Nicolas
>> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org


Mime
View raw message