geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Guillaume Nodet" <gno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [vote] Release geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.0
Date Thu, 21 Dec 2006 21:06:35 GMT
I think voting on svn source for small projects / jars is good,
because people can build them locally, check that everything
is ok (for legal reasons), and vote.  This is much more difficult
for Geronimo server, of course, and may not be applied.

This works well, I think, if the release process is just
   mvn release:prepare release:perform
which should be the case for all projects ideally.
The benefit is that the jars will be deployed to their final destination
as part of the relase, without having to tweak / corrupting maven
repository metadata by copying from a staging repo.

On 12/21/06, Matt Hogstrom <matt@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> > >
> Thanks...this was the missing context for me.  I spect I'm not the
> only one who doesn't hang on the incubator thread so this helps.
>
> I'm confused about Roy's comments as there are specific requirements
> for including legal stuff in the binaries.  Sounds like he is
> advocating everyone building their own copy and validating it.
>
> Since this is a change in process it would be good to outline how you
> propose it working for the benefit of the many on the list that don't
> have the benefit of your thinking apart from the reference above.
>
> I would very much like to see us change the process and the specs are
> probably a really good place to start.  I'm +1 for changing the
> process.  I would very much like to get the new process documented so
> that you don't end up becoming the release dog and have everyone
> making up a new way each time which is currently where we are at.
>
> Other people's thoughts?
>
> Matt Hogstrom
> matt@hogstrom.org
>
>
>


-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet

Mime
View raw message