groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cédric Champeau <cchamp...@apache.org>
Subject Re: In shape for a 2.4.4 release?
Date Tue, 19 May 2015 20:02:34 GMT
2015-05-19 21:59 GMT+02:00 Keegan Witt <keeganwitt@gmail.com>:

> If they require -incubating in the filename, does that mean it'll be in
> the Maven coordinates as well?  If so, that's unfortunate since there are
> many tools (like IntelliJ) that probably won't be able to automatically
> locate the source jar.
>
> No, the Maven coordinates will not change. Only the source zip will have
-incubating in the file name.


> -Keegan
>
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Cédric Champeau <cchampeau@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>>  Hi guys,
>>
>> I wanted to check with you what is preventing us from releasing 2.4.4.
>> Apart from the usual bugfixes, I think the necessary work on the source
>> code itself to match the Apache guidance has been done (in particular
>> licenses checks).
>>
>> From my perspective it should be possible to release using the "old
>> process" with subtle differences:
>>
>> - a release manager chosen from the IPMC will initiate the release
>> - release will be done from the CI server
>> - binaries/sources/distributions will be signed automatically, as usual,
>> through Bintray
>> - Maven artifacts will be published automatically on Artifactory (OJO)
>>
>> So far, nothing differs from the usual process but:
>>
>> - Maven Central synchronization *will* be disabled, instead of done
>> automatically until now, so that we can cancel the release if it is
>> downvoted
>> - Sources/distributions need to be copied manually from Bintray to [1] by
>> the release manager (attn mentors: how?)
>> - since we do not generate MD5 files through Gradle yet (it's not a
>> technical problem), the release manager should generate the checksums for
>> sources/distributions/binaries and upload them to [1] too. An open question
>> is whether those signatures should be generated in Bintray, in which case
>> we need support from them, or from our side, in which case we have to
>> update the build to generate them and make them artifacts.
>> - release manager announces on dev@ and voting starts
>> - if vote is positive, release manager asks IPMC to vote
>> - if vote is positive, release manager triggers Maven Central
>> synchronization from Bintray and announces the release on the MLs
>> - if vote is positive, website needs to be updated too [2]
>>
>> We have chosen to use a version number *without* -incubating for the
>> artifacts. Only the sources zip will have -incubating in the file name, as
>> the incubator policy mandates. The website download logic will have to be
>> adapted for this special case.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> [1] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/groovy
>> [2] https://github.com/groovy/groovy-website
>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message