geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Paul McMahan" <paulmcma...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 1.2 Fit and Finish
Date Thu, 02 Nov 2006 19:08:39 GMT
OK I had a hunch something might break but I figured I would ask
anyway just in case there was a way.  For now I can probably
manufacture a reasonable test env on my local machine but as the
server gets more componentized as plugins I think it will become more
important to test the system as a whole before releasing.  To me that
means base server, plugins, and plugin repos bits are all tested in
the same configuration that a user will see when the release is
announced.

BTW, we're close to the point where you can install the framework
assembly and then use the CLI to slurp in the admin console and all
its dependencies from the 1.2 plugin repo at
http://geronimo.apache.org/plugins/geronimo-1.2/.   Looking forward
I'm excited about the new possibilities this opens up for us in how we
release.

Best wishes,
Paul

On 11/1/06, Dain Sundstrom <dain@iq80.com> wrote:
> It isn't really possible to publish a "1.2" release like that.  It
> would break lots of stuff (like maven) that assumes that there will
> only ever be a single 1.2 release.  Why can't you test against a 1.2-
> timestamp release?
>
> -dain
>
> On Nov 1, 2006, at 5:55 AM, Paul McMahan wrote:
>
> > One of the activities to coordinate when finalizing the release is
> > updating the 1.2 plugin repository catalog at:
> > http://geronimo.apache.org/plugins/geronimo-1.2/geronimo-plugins.xml
> > to point at a repo where the 1.2 artifacts are published instead of
> > the snapshot repo it currently points at.  For testing purposes it
> > would be ideal to build Geronimo as version "1.2" (not "1.2rc1" or
> > "1.2.timestamp" or something like that) and publish the 1.2 artifacts
> > to a maven2 repo during the release candidate cycle.  That would allow
> > us to test the plugin system in pretty much the exact state it will be
> > when 1.2 is released.  Is that feasible?  If not then we may need to
> > work out an alternate approach where the repository catalog gets
> > updated after the release goes out and the artifacts get published.
> > That makes me a little nervous though since it will be too late to
> > make changes to the server if something doesn't work right.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Paul
> >
> >
> > On 10/30/06, Dain Sundstrom <dain@iq80.com> wrote:
> >> In a typical Geronimo release we tend to spend a significant amount
> >> of time in what I'll call the "Fit and Finish" phase.  This involves
> >> tying up loose ends such as log levels, tools L&F, startup times,
> >> licenses and so on.  Basically, the phase includes fixing all the
> >> nits that cause people to vote -1 for a release (BTW no vetos in a
> >> release vote).
> >>
> >> Please, take a moment and respond to this email with any items you
> >> feel should be cleaned up before we release the software.  That way
> >> we can hopefully get these items out in the open and addressed while
> >> we are finishing the TCK testing.  Please note that just because an
> >> item is mentioned doesn't mean it must be completed before a
> >> release.  The only thing required for a release it to successfully
> >> pass a vote of the PMC, so if the item is critical to you, spend a
> >> few minutes fixing it.
> >>
> >> With any luck we should be able to have the server ready to ship
> >> about the same time we finish the TCK testing.
> >>
> >> -dain
> >>
>
>

Mime
View raw message