commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jörg Schaible <>
Subject RE: [logging] Are we ready for 1.1.1?
Date Wed, 20 Dec 2006 07:17:52 GMT
Hi Simon, wrote on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 10:27 PM:

> ---- Craig McClanahan <> wrote:
>> On 12/19/06, Dennis Lundberg <> wrote:
>>> I've looked through the list of unscheduled issues [1] and can't
>>> find anything that need to go into a 1.1.1 release.
> I'm not aware of any fetaures or bugfixes waiting.
>> How are we going to create the release?
>>> 1. Ant
>>> 2. Maven 1
>>> 3. Maven 2
>>> Or some combination of them? My guess is to use Ant for the
>>> source/binaries distros and Maven 1 for the site.
> My preference would be to build using maven2, with -source
> and -target set to 1.2 and 1.1 respectively (using a JVM >=
> 1.4 of course, as that's what maven needs). To check 1.2
> compatibility, we could then run just the integration tests
> as a separate step using java 1.2.
> However this would require that:
> (a) "mvn site" works. Currently this generates odd errors I
> don't understand

You might still use M1 to generatge the site though. Just configure the release plugin of
M2 to run only "deploy" instead of "deploy, site-deploy" as long as site generation does not
work with M2.

> (b) there is an obvious way of setting -source and -target
> values, so they default to 1.2/1.1 but users can override.
> I'm sure there is, but I don't know what it is.
> (c) the itest target supports running tests using an external JVM
> Using a single build tool to produce a release is much easier
> than using ant to build the code and maven1 to build the
> site, then stitching the results together.

Well, since M2 is not yet up to date with M1 building the site, catch 22 ;-)

>> My understanding is that "Maven 1 for the site" is required to get
>> the current Commons L&F.  I don't have an opinion on which is the
>> best to actually make the binaries of the release.
> As noted above, it would be great if we could get the site
> building using maven2.

Yeah. Definitely.

>> Is there anything else that needs to be done, besides the
> normal release
>>> cycle?
>> I think we're set.
> I'd like to see a reasonable time for users to assess a
> release candidate. Getting the nightlies working would be a
> good first step; currently nightlies for logging uses
> maven1.x, which means that ONLY the site is actually being
> built nightly..

A working nightly M2 build would be really great.

- Jörg

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message