commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Why is releasing such a pain and what can we do to make it easier?
Date Sun, 13 Oct 2013 22:47:08 GMT
On 9 October 2013 05:43, Stefan Bodewig <bodewig@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2013-10-08, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>
>> you are involved in other projects (like log4j2) how do they do it? Is
>> it easier to release log4j2 than it is to release for example [lang]?
>
> Over the past year I've cut releases at the ASF for Commons Compress,
> Ant and log4net and outside of the ASF of a small company sponsored QMQP
> library at github and XMLUnit at sourceforge.
>
> The QMQP lib was trivial to release because I didn't have to vote,
> didn't intend to have a proper distribution outside of MC and the only
> site is the Readme.md.  This wouldn't be possible for anything
> non-trivial.  Still there was a Nexus between my command line and Maven
> central and it's been more than a single step.
>
> All ASF releases and XMLUnit have been similar - it is always a painful
> manual process.  Create a tag, build the stuff upload to Nexus (not for
> log4net), upload non Maven-distributables, update site.  In XMLUnit I
> can skip the votes, but I don't see how to make anything of this a lot
> easier.
>
> As long as we think we have to distribute things to three places and
> vote on all of them, I don't see how to simplify things.  I must admit
> I'm not sure we actually have to do that, we can change the site as
> often as we want to, so why vote on it?

I don't think we do vote on it; it's provided for convenience and for
people to review for obvious omissions.

> And we can trust our tooling,

Sorry, but that is not the case.
There are lots of ways that the build process can break.
I was assured categorically on the Maven dev list that their release
process was fool-proof.
Several releases were later found to have spurious files in the source bundles.

> why vote on Nexus staged artifacts if the tarball is fine?  I'm not
> talking about releasing to MC directly but rather about not pushing
> anything to Nexus before the vote on the tarball has passed.  This could
> reduce the release process to tagging and publishing the tarballs before
> the vote.

So where are you going to publish the tarballs?
At some point the tarballs are going to have to end up on Nexus
anyway, so why not use it?

> At work I've been cutting releases for stuff built from 15 git repos
> every two weeks - at the end of scrum sprints.  We've automated things
> so far that it is mostly down to tagging the repositories and the rest
> is done by CI.
>
> But there are things the build process doesn't do and that cannot be
> automated for good reasons - PGP signing for example.  I wouldn't want
> to put a private key on a CI machine, or rather I wouldn't trust a key
> that lived on such a machine.

ASF infra would not allow that.

> In addition I probably wouldn't trust the artifacts built on a public CI
> machine that is open to as many people as our Jenkins either - it would
> be a beautiful target for attacks and a great resource for publishing
> backdoored releases if we were to rely on CI to build our releases.

Indeed.

> Stefan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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