directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Emmanuel Lecharny" <elecha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Directory Studio 1.1.0
Date Sat, 29 Mar 2008 09:03:11 GMT
Take 2, after a good sleep :)

David, you are plain right. I rehashed the full mail again this
morning under my shower, and what you said about revision is just
correct.

Forgive my previous answer.

I suggest that we freeze the code, create a branch (1.1.0-GA) and vote
this branch.

Is that OK ?

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 6:27 PM, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
>  >
>  > -1
>  > I'm all for releasing ADS 1.1.0 real soon now and have no problems with the
>  > code but...
>  > This doesn't say what we're voting on.
>
>  We are voting on the Roadmap version (cf JIRA). As soon as all the
>  issues are closed, we can  vote. If every modification and every bug
>  is filled into JIRA, this is the way to go.
>
>
>  While I prefer voting on actual
>  > artifacts that I can check I'm ok with voting on a specific svn revision of
>  > a particular code base as long as its clearly specified together with the
>  > expected build method.  This vote looks to me like a referendum on "should
>  > we tag something and vote on the tag" rather than a vote on something
>  > specific.
>  No, this is not a referendum. I really think that a project should be
>  JIRA driven, and not SVN driven. That does not make a lot of sense to
>  vote for a SVN IMHO, because there are so much little changes which
>  could be committed after a vote... Like some svn:ignore tags, or
>  whatever cosmetic fixes.
>
>  At least, this is the way we work at Directory, and this is now 3
>  years and many votes we have proceeded this way.
>
>  I'm sure that other projects prefer some other 'algorithm', but I'm
>  pretty confident that we are not completly off the track following
>  JIRA's roadmap.
>
>
>
>  > So, I'll guess randomly :-) that this is intended to be a vote on
>  > directory/studio/trunk rev 641069.
>
>  No, this will be a vote on Studio 1.1.0 as described in JIRA roadmap
>  for this project.
>
>
>  >
>  > First, and this is a blocker, there are no hardcoded LICENSE and NOTICE
>  > files in svn at the checkout root.  I'm happy to help with constructing
>  > appropriate files but since I don't know anything about studio I can't
>  > really do it myself.  If all the files in svn under the checkout root is asf
>  > licensed with no other restrictions (such as from being copied from
>  > somewhere else) then the AL goes in the LICENSE and the NOTICE file is the
>  > minimal:
>  >
>  > ----------
>  > Apache Directory Studio Copyright xxx-2008 The Apache Software Foundation
>  > This product includes software developed byThe Apache Software Foundation
>  > (http://www.apache.org/).
>  > ----------
>  > If there is code from other sources please let me know what it is and I'll
>  > try to help figure out what we need to do.  I don't know the Studio
>  > inception year... this needs to replace the xxx.  Neither this LICENSE nor
>  > NOTICE file needs to reflect any dependencies of the project, just the stuff
>  > that is actually in svn.
>
>  This is something we should clearly address before releasing.
>  Pierre-Arnaud, Stefan ?
>
>
>
>  > Since this doesn't specify an expected build method I have to assume it uses
>  > the only one I know about... maven.
>
>  Felix, Pierre-Arnaud and Stefan spent more than one month creating a
>  Maven build for this project, with a lot of sweat and blood... So yes,
>  we have a maven build for Studio now !
>
>
>  In this case this is not suitable for
>  > release since it has a snapshot parent pom:
>  >
>  >
>  >   <parent>
>  >     <groupId>org.apache.directory.project</groupId>
>  >     <artifactId>project</artifactId>
>  >     <version>10-SNAPSHOT</version>
>  >   </parent>
>  >
>  > I'm also slightly worried about the SNAPSHOT versions in the properties in
>  > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/directory/studio/trunk/pom.xml?view=markup.
>  > They might get changed to something that aren't snapshots during the actual
>  > release process but I have no way to know that.
>
>  In order to release, we usually create a freezed branch, and we setup
>  all the versions in this branch. As soon as the vote is closed, then
>  it becomes the release. I think the process is defined on our wiki
>  (http://directory.apache.org/studio/releasing-a-new-version.html), but
>  this may need some twiking...
>
>
>  >
>  > It's also extremely desirable to lock down all the maven plugins with
>  > explicit versions.
>
>  I haven't looked at the pom.xml files, but if there is no dependency
>  manager, we must add one.
>
>
>  >
>  > Another thing I'm concerned about from a few days ago is that the maven
>  > build produces some kind of update site thingy that doesn't include legal
>  > files.  I disabled the check for legal files for it.  If this is something
>  > that might get into a maven repo this needs to be fixed.
>
>  We have to check the lack of legal files.
>
>  >
>  > sorry...
>
>  Don't. Those are important matters, and we have to clean the place
>  now, otherwise, we will carry those guys for another 6 months period
>  ...
>
>
>  Thanks David !
>
>  --
>  Regards,
>  Cordialement,
>
>
> Emmanuel L├ęcharny
>  www.iktek.com
>



-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel L├ęcharny
www.iktek.com

Mime
View raw message