Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13C23200CB0 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 19:05:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 12FE3160BE5; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:05:04 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 5873F160BE2 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 19:05:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 70872 invoked by uid 500); 23 Jun 2017 17:05:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@gearpump.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@gearpump.incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@gearpump.incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 70855 invoked by uid 99); 23 Jun 2017 17:05:02 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:05:02 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 2E90C188ABB for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:05:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.522 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.522 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9pkwEDdAk700 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:05:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with SMTP id A17DB5F6C3 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:05:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 70839 invoked by uid 99); 23 Jun 2017 17:04:59 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:04:59 +0000 Received: from mail-wr0-f169.google.com (mail-wr0-f169.google.com [209.85.128.169]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id C7C171A00A2 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:04:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr0-f169.google.com with SMTP id k67so73416288wrc.2 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 10:04:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOxAYx0BfsO5aymXInSTEXLvEPdAyILQpffWilut0SgLgj+HAMCj kdTs3CeiBUoPrj6HMgJP+3RMe/SYUQ== X-Received: by 10.223.131.66 with SMTP id 60mr6918029wrd.54.1498237496739; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 10:04:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.174.142 with HTTP; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 10:04:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Karol Brejna Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 19:04:56 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn dev repo cleanups To: dev@gearpump.incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" archived-at: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:05:04 -0000 (continued) ... the artifacts from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/gearpump' to https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/gearpump/ repo, so we don't loose any historical data. The situation is worse when we have multiple release candidates.Erasing the old artifacts would quicken the release procedure. Please, tell me what you think. Karol On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Karol Brejna wrote: > I am preparing artifacts for 0.8.4 release. > > On of the steps is to publish them to svn. > In order to publish, you need to check out svn repo (which in turn > pull all files stored there). > > The files got quite sizeble: > > 575180 gearpump/.svn > 185280 gearpump/0.8.2-incubating > 245708 gearpump/0.8.3-incubating > > > So it's about 1GB worth of files which transfer takes quite a long time. > > I am proposing enriching our release procedure with a step of cleaning > release artifacts after the release. > > After release we move