From dev-return-17795-apmail-geronimo-dev-archive=geronimo.apache.org@geronimo.apache.org Mon Oct 03 01:06:19 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 42854 invoked from network); 3 Oct 2005 01:06:18 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Oct 2005 01:06:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 72299 invoked by uid 500); 3 Oct 2005 01:06:07 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 72220 invoked by uid 500); 3 Oct 2005 01:06:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 72207 invoked by uid 99); 3 Oct 2005 01:06:06 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 18:06:06 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_BY_IP,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of ammulder@gmail.com designates 64.233.162.205 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.162.205] (HELO zproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.162.205) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 18:06:10 -0700 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 9so3908nzo for ; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 18:05:43 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=BzMmcqaw/si9Ir5MlTThWuoYPVwATuASCyY94m+n7Li+xciySkn2SbnxtTZWV/XlDEiRWWyASp0C0QPyUgbBLJwOYsDFu9JJgH9jJG+ETozPJV2T9iYTCMVgZ8fCRBMePmIQhJzo7pdSSDK7hZ2RB+d7XhSKi/IyslZdd7dImTQ= Received: by 10.36.224.22 with SMTP id w22mr468642nzg; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 18:05:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.37.13.67 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Oct 2005 18:05:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <74e15baa0510021805p4077010dy1ea65d6721955374@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 21:05:40 -0400 From: Aaron Mulder Reply-To: Aaron Mulder Sender: ammulder@gmail.com To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] -- M5 release -- (Was Re: 1.0-M5 candidate build) In-Reply-To: <5dc7960c34a28f416cc8a92c759d8a98@yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <2f8560424082c7b0e71d6c7ebe5ca767@yahoo.com> <81DF82ED-7383-4C47-8B10-33757BC69473@apache.org> <74e15baa0510020800o78740924xec130de9cccaf3c9@mail.gmail.com> <97d743854acc4e936cec7ee1a75a2a9a@yahoo.com> <74e15baa0510021424q42a6c06dme9623248368e65cd@mail.gmail.com> <5dc7960c34a28f416cc8a92c759d8a98@yahoo.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Well, as soon as IzPack 3.8 goes final, it should be in Maven -- the previous release is. I would be happy to make that a condition of Geronimo 1.0, but I don't think it's necessary for M5. It's fine with me if the installer is build by unpacking the assembly zip. Aaron On 10/2/05, David Jencks wrote: > I think there are a couple of issues: > 1. It is a really lot of work to run the tck, and I'm not up for doing > it again for a while. I would prefer to find a way to claim that the > geronimo installer is covered by the tests run on the zip distro. I > would be quite happy claiming this if the installer was built by > unpacking the zip into the installer directory rather than copying > all/most of the files. It's probably fine if we build the installer > using the same assembly directory, but I'd like some other opinions on > this. > > 2. Related to the above, we should build the installer on the same > assembly module copy as the zip. That's one of David Blevin's > machines, so he should do it. > > > > Also, if we can distribute our own Axis, I'm sure we can distribute > > our own IzPack. But really, I don't think there's a compelling need > > to, since no one needs IzPack to install or run the product. (Also, > > you say you couldn't get a copy for yourself, but that's only because > > the download was troublesome for you, right? If I had a nickel for > > every time ibiblio crapped out... :) > > Ibiblio sometimes has problems, but it is a well known well advertised > site with automated downloads and usually works fine. Stuff available > from it has at least theoretically been officially released by its > authors. The current version of izpack is on a secret site that you > need a password for and that in my experience has not yet worked. It > has not been officially released and I have no idea how it was built. > I'm not sure how much of an issue I have with this for M5 but I really > don't want to continue this state of affairs through the next release. > I think izpack has to be run from maven. > > Anyone else have an opinion? > > thanks > david jencks > > > > Aaron > > > > On 10/2/05, David Jencks wrote: > >> > >> On Oct 2, 2005, at 8:00 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote: > >> > >>> Cool. Can you publish a candidate installer, too? > >> > >> well, I'm not sure. I see two potential problems, aside from being > >> too > >> tired right now to put it together :-) > >> > >> 1. We aren't set up to certify it, how would we make it clear that the > >> installer version wasn't certified? Or is it certified??? I'd prefer > >> to find a way to certify the installer based version. I think it > >> would > >> be easy to build the installer using maven, but I'm not sure about > >> unpacking/running it to get something to test. If we found a way to > >> make the installer include the certified zip distribution and just > >> unpack it and change the config.* files I don't think this would be an > >> issue. Maybe it's ok to claim the installer is certified if it is > >> built from the same assembly as the zip. I'm just not sure. > >> > >> 2. It's built with unreleased software that I at least couldn't get > >> for > >> myself. I suppose that we could include a copy of the installer kit > >> version we use, as we have included a copy of axis. > >> > >> Anyway I hope we can figure out a way to answer these questions so we > >> can put out a installer version. > >> > >> thanks > >> david jencks > >> > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Aaron > >>> > >>> On 10/2/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > >>>> (just making it clear for others) > >>>> > >>>> +1 from me > >>>> > >>>> Thanks everyone for the incredible work to make this happen. > >>>> > >>>> geir > >>>> > >>>> On Oct 2, 2005, at 8:15 AM, David Jencks wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> The 1.0-M5 branch passed all the tck tests, so David Blevins and I > >>>>> have tagged geronimo and openejb and built a candidate 1.0-M5 zip. > >>>>> We are running the tck on this. > >>>>> > >>>>> The zip is available for testing at > >>>>> > >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~dblevins/geronimo-1.0-M5.zip > >>>>> > >>>>> We'd like to call for a vote on a release based on this tag > >>>>> conditional on the tck passing (again). I think the process would > >>>>> be that after the vote we would work on publishing the jars, this > >>>>> zip distribution, and a source distribution. > >>>>> > >>>>> Many thanks, > >>>>> david jencks > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 > >>>> geirm@apache.org > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > >