commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Luc Maisonobe <Luc.Maison...@free.fr>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release math 2.2 based on RC5
Date Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:47:31 GMT
Le 26/02/2011 17:11, Phil Steitz a écrit :
> On 2/25/11 5:15 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>> Tag:
>> <http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/math/tags/MATH_2_2_RC5/>
>>
>> All artifacts in Nexus staging repository:
>> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-051/org/apache/commons/commons-math/2.2/>
>>
>> site:
>> <http://people.apache.org/builds/commons/math/2.2/RC5/>
>>
>> Clirr report:
>> <http://people.apache.org/builds/commons/math/2.2/RC5/clirr-report.html>
>>
>> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours, 2011-02-28T11:00:00 UTC
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release these artifacts
>> [ ] +0 OK, but...
>> [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
>> [ ] -1 I oppose this release because...
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Luc
>>
>>
> I am struggling a little on this one.  The code is good.  Builds and
> tests fine. Sigs are good.  Release contents are good.  But the user
> guide packaging is not as good as 2.0-2.1, IMO.  The reason that I
> introduced the siteMods stuff in 2.0 was so that we could bundle
> just the user guide as a self-contained set of web pages in the
> binary distro.  Just file filtering from a full site build results
> in broken links in the nav and the appearance of the whole site,
> with only the user guide content available.  On the other hand, to
> fix this, you need to do what the build script does or something
> similar (at least I couldn't find a way to get it to work
> otherwise), which means you can't just have maven build and deploy
> the whole release without additional scripting or commands.  The nav
> links in the user guide into the user guide itself work and the
> links from the user guide to the bundled javadoc work, so this is
> really just an appearance/useability issue.
> 
> So I guess I am +0 on this RC.  The broken links / appearance issues
> are not enough for -1, or even -0, but I would rather ship the
> cleaner version.  I don't know how nexus works, but I would expect
> that it should be possible to generate just the binary distro and
> push it out there somehow if you decide to do another RC.

OK. Perhaps I could try what Sebb suggested: using the siteMods/pom.xml
and siteMods/site.xml stuff directly from maven. I could even do the
site manually with your script and later use mvn deploy.

I will give it a try first without cancelling this RC vote. If I succeed
in having a fully functional menu with only the required links, then
I'll cancel the vote and push an RC6.

What should we do about the duplicate javadoc in binary ? Do we keep
both the jar and the expanded version in the binary zip or do we
suppress one of them ? If we suppress one, which one ?

Luc

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


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


Mime
View raw message