Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-128152-apmail-commons-dev-archive=commons.apache.org@commons.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3C1F87F02
	for <apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Wed,  3 Aug 2011 20:38:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 38820 invoked by uid 500); 3 Aug 2011 20:38:21 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@commons.apache.org
Received: (qmail 38723 invoked by uid 500); 3 Aug 2011 20:38:20 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:dev-help@commons.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@commons.apache.org>
List-Id: <dev.commons.apache.org>
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@commons.apache.org
Received: (qmail 38715 invoked by uid 99); 3 Aug 2011 20:38:20 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 20:38:20 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0
	tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of niall.pemberton@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.216.43 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.216.43] (HELO mail-qw0-f43.google.com) (209.85.216.43)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 20:38:12 +0000
Received: by qwf6 with SMTP id 6so831776qwf.30
        for <dev@commons.apache.org>; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:37:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=nfIFNVioSFbWVG1g9lsLTXxms2PrpOp6dOe9KtahxR0=;
        b=KHN8lhIqEoWJpFWu1FZGv0HJROKNyD8nMmwumiiUYaZZRBHmss4LAlQV/LpeB2VWN6
         G5xoUrLUcmPg7HoB/yikkIAEgoeyjxSSKnDAxTJPLBY9LJ77UIU6tifska/eNDnd3STB
         zvKXFInAE+yUSe1+L4iQbVckZgjZfeHD9/frQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.78.164 with SMTP id l36mr5571393qck.226.1312403871268;
 Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:37:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.219.11 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:37:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAPVuaYs97_RS46HGeCihLt6G5pKFnDkmj3EnkdqVfW0Lr3ZGhA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E38087D.9040807@apache.org>
	<CAPVuaYsU9zK7sPfbuefA0Eu3XSu56Kr3gXw74BBMVLLOoQ2MAQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E38CEFA.5000104@gmail.com>
	<CAPVuaYs97_RS46HGeCihLt6G5pKFnDkmj3EnkdqVfW0Lr3ZGhA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 21:37:51 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAPmHmDSkxvC7bT_U6Cqh=f6OksQuoGHQ4FEEwjL6QFnn=R7y1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
From: Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com>
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Henri Yandell <flamefew@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com> wrote=
:
>> On 8/2/11 5:22 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org> wrot=
e:
>>>> Are we still going to deploy Maven artifacts by SCPing to
>>>> m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository on people.apache.org?
>>>>
>>>> I've been discussing the permissions issue for the old groupIds on Nex=
us
>>>> with the Infra team (i.e components using the old groupId
>>>> commons-<componentname> need a specific configuration on the snapshot =
and
>>>> release repositories).
>>>>
>>>> Brian Demers kindly proposed to allow the deployment of all commons-* =
groups
>>>> on Nexus, but it would require to block the deployment through
>>>> people.apache.org to avoid metadata conflicts.
>>>>
>>>> Do we all agree on using exclusively Nexus for our releases?
>>
>> I would prefer to leave the door open to release more point releases
>> of [pool] and [dbcp] 1.x using the working scripts that i have, so
>> pls do not nuke those. =A0The new versions are in the org.apache
>> groupId tree, so we will have no choice but to use nexus for those.
>>
>> I will have agree to use nexus for the maven repo bits, but prefer
>> to create the actual release artifacts locally, examine them, call a
>> VOTE on them and move the same bits to /dist. =A0Personally, I would
>> rather see us move back the other way (use the Tomcat setup, with
>> Ant tasks pushing to p.a.o/rysnch), but I can see I am in the
>> minority here, so will not stand in the way.
>
> Well, I'm in the same minority and I'm not aware it's a minority (have
> we taken a vote from those release managing?).

Me too. When maven works, its great - but when it doesn't it makes you
want to tear your hair out. The only releases I've done using the
release plugin were commons-parent & the build plugin. That was a
while ago, but more often than not there were issues.

Niall


> Nexus, Maven release-plugin, they all fire off my keep-it-simple
> warning flags. They mistake magic for simplicity.
>
> Hen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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