From dev-return-49061-apmail-geronimo-dev-archive=geronimo.apache.org@geronimo.apache.org Wed Apr 04 17:08:12 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 71860 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2007 17:08:11 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Apr 2007 17:08:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 61781 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2007 17:08:15 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 61740 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2007 17:08:15 -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 61729 invoked by uid 99); 4 Apr 2007 17:08:15 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 10:08:15 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.6 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: 208.97.132.202 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of sppatel2@gmail.com) Received: from [208.97.132.202] (HELO spaceymail-a3.g.dreamhost.com) (208.97.132.202) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 10:08:06 -0700 Received: from [9.27.41.168] (bi01p1.nc.us.ibm.com [129.33.49.251]) by spaceymail-a3.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A528C195EC8 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 10:07:36 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) In-Reply-To: <2CF588BA-0963-4179-8CCD-6270EB49B0EF@hogstrom.org> References: <1b5bfeb50704030055n1ded447el9c0a088cebc01675@mail.gmail.com> <1f52a95c0704030257k156271cas12bdb37338138c5@mail.gmail.com> <09C45F0A-10D2-4200-B59B-E54143FA0288@yahoo.com> <4612BFBB.2000202@apache.org> <4612C7D0.4020209@gmail.com> <4612FF96.4000605@apache.org> <69132D29-7DD5-4EBB-BFDA-575667DE654E@toolazydogs.com> <2CF588BA-0963-4179-8CCD-6270EB49B0EF@hogstrom.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <6A405C3A-A450-4CD1-B1FC-965E93E52DA7@gmail.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Sachin Patel Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] 2.0-M4 Binaries available (rc1) - rc1 is dead Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 13:07:40 -0400 To: dev@geronimo.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org So moving forward is reproducibility of our milestone builds always going to be an issue? I think this is pretty ridiculous that this is such a painful process and I understand Matt's frustration. Does any one know if Maven is using us as a case-study and working toward addressing some of our major concerns? If not, do we look toward another build solution in the future? -sachin On Apr 4, 2007, at 11:33 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: > Here's my 0.02 c. > > The process is owrking well as (I think it was Rakesh) that > identified something odd about the binaries. We should not have > both artifacts (2.0-M4 and 2.0-M4-SNAPSHOT) in the binaries. > > As release manager I am not comfortable releasing these and I'm > concerned about where they got picked up and will investigate this. > > I will work today to spin up a corrected set of binaries that > addresses the issues we've been discussing (buildability, etc.) > > I have to say that every release is a learning experience. So, for > my part doing this once a month has been useful as it flushes out a > new set of issues. Geronimo is so dependent on external projects > that we are in a unique (and difficult) position from a release > standpoint as our dependent projects do not release in a > coordinated fashion. > > I have a check list of how to build and am augmenting it with a > list of things to look for...something new every time :)