incubator-blur-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [CANCELED] [VOTE] Release Blur version 0.2.0-incubating
Date Tue, 10 Sep 2013 21:27:22 GMT
fwiw the Blur jenkins jobs are not green. Might be good to have these
green as part of your release process: (not a blocker though). You can
see the issues here:

https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Blur/
https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Blur/job/Blur-master-jdk6/
https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Blur/job/Blur-master-jdk7/

LMK if you need tweaks, you can also be added as a jenkins admin if
you want to manage these (add more, etc...) yourselves.

Patrick

On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Aaron McCurry <amccurry@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am canceling the vote and working through the issues that phunt posted.
>  We will cut a new release once these issues are addressed.
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Aaron McCurry <amccurry@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Agreed, I'm changing the assembly plugin to pull them in during the binary
>> artifact creation.  Thanks.
>>
>> Aaron
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Doug Cutting <cutting@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > An aside - why do you need to distribute generated files in the source
>>> > artifact? Perhaps consider not committing/including them? (only in the
>>> > bin)
>>> >
>>>
>>> +1 I think it's best if the source release is nearly identical to a clean
>>> checkout of the release tag, and we should avoid committing generated
>>> files
>>> unless the generating software is not easily available to all developers
>>> (which is not great either).
>>>
>>> Doug
>>>
>>
>>

Mime
View raw message