Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 87756 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2010 07:44:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2010 07:44:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 41857 invoked by uid 500); 22 Dec 2010 07:44:27 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 41506 invoked by uid 500); 22 Dec 2010 07:44:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 41498 invoked by uid 99); 22 Dec 2010 07:44:26 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 07:44:26 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jak-commons-dev@m.gmane.org designates 80.91.229.12 as permitted sender) Received: from [80.91.229.12] (HELO lo.gmane.org) (80.91.229.12) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 07:44:18 +0000 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PVJMb-0004LQ-Li for dev@commons.apache.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:43:57 +0100 Received: from mail.elsag-solutions.com ([62.154.225.82]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:43:57 +0100 Received: from joerg.schaible by mail.elsag-solutions.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:43:57 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: dev@commons.apache.org From: =?UTF-8?B?SsO2cmc=?= Schaible Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0 Followup-To: gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:43:46 +0100 Lines: 76 Message-ID: References: <3360569A-D640-453F-BE04-0EE71F323716@dslextreme.com> <2DA7C966-E3E1-46A4-BCC9-9BED3F6284C0@dslextreme.com> <2A0CC64A-810F-4089-B018-4F6A27C0B517@dslextreme.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.elsag-solutions.com User-Agent: KNode/4.4.7 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi, Phil Steitz wrote: > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:48 PM, sebb wrote: > >> On 22 December 2010 00:11, Phil Steitz wrote: >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers >> > > >wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote: >> >> >> >> > On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers >> >> wrote >> >> > >> >> >> I have not included release notes in the src zip since my >> understanding >> >> is the src zip should contain the directories pretty much as they >> >> exist >> in >> >> SVN. Instead I have added a README.txt that tells a user how to >> generate >> >> the announcement file. >> >> > >> >> > I would prefer to see the release notes generated and checked into >> >> > SVN; they can then be included in both source and binary archives. >> >> > >> >> > See for example MATH and NET (2.0) >> >> >> >> I looked at net/trunk. I would prefer that the release notes be >> generated >> >> during mvn release:prepare instead of requiring a manual mvn >> >> invocation >> to >> >> create the release notes and then a commit. I have that working for >> >> the binary distribution but I don't want to do it for the source >> distribution >> >> since they shouldn't be included if they aren't in svn and, in my >> >> view, >> they >> >> shouldn't be in svn because they will generally be out of sync with >> >> changes.xml in trunk. >> >> >> >> I would say that is up to the RM :) >> > >> > I personally don't have a problem with the out-of-synch condition. >> > What >> is >> > important is, like changes.xml or any other file, what gets tagged and >> > released. >> >> +1 >> >> I think it's vital that the release notes are included in the source >> release. >> >> The user should not be required to run a command to create the release >> notes. >> >> But the RM should definitely *look at* the generated release notes and, > IMO, intentionally committing them is a good thing. Nothing generated > directly from maven has ever met my expectations in terms of formatting > and > content, so I have always ended up tweaking the generated files. I don't > see this as onerous, personally. Then why not generating it directly before the release manually, "finalize" it and commit it? After a release it can be deleted again in svn. All we need then is a verification that the file exists while releasing. This can be done by the verifier plugin (best to bind the goal to the validation phase) in the release profile. - Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org