incubator-sanselan-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Sanselan 0.93 Release Vote
Date Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:09:59 GMT
The process doesn't have to fail if you want to respin a build.

You can have as many votes as you like for the same release 0.93.

You are right that the general at incubator list doesn't really want  
to watch the dev list iterate until there is a release that the dev  
team is happy with. Then, when dev is happy, you post the vote on  
general at incubator.

The normal practice is for votes to have a subject line that includes  
[VOTE] in the subject line.

If a vote fails, you can call another vote with a note like (second  
try) in the subject line, if you are keeping the same artifact name.

Alternatively, you can add more descriptive tags to the path of the  
artifacts, e.g. ~cmchen/dist/incubator/sanselan/0.93-try2/ 
sanselan-0.93-incubating-bin.tar.gz. After a successful vote of 0.93- 
try2 you can rename the path before copying it (or copy it with the  
correct name).

Of course, it's also ok to respin with a complete new release number,  
but as you've seen, changing the path names and pom version numbers is  
pretty painful if all you need to do is to change a few bits and  
respin the release.

Whatever process the team decides on, it should be documented in the  
svn tree, perhaps in a high level document (at the same level as  
trunk) called HowToRelease.txt or something similar. The process for  
release naming and tagging/branching should also be documented.


On Jul 22, 2008, at 4:03 PM, Charles Matthew Chen wrote:

> Hi Jeremias,
>   Thanks for the valuable notes.  I've generated a new version
> (0.94), available here:
> * I've used the prefix: apache-sanselan-incubating.
> * I've added an incubating disclaimer to the README file.
> * I've consolidated the "temp" and "tmp" folders.
> * That DynamicImport is indeed unnecessary; I've removed it.
> * I've fixed the Bundle-Description and Bundle-DocURL properties of
> the manifest.
> * I've modified the pom.xml to use custom assembly descriptors that
> I've checked in under src/assemble.  I've used them to a) remove the
> .bz2-compressed files. b) add the KEYS file to the bin distribution.
>   I also figured out how to include the javadocs in the binary
> release, but only after I made the release.  If its all the same,
> let's include them in future releases.
>> Doesn't the vote need to be on the main incubator mailing list?
>   I'm not sure, but I'm looking at:
> """
> The conventional process is for the podling to follow the usual Apache
> process (including TODO: link release vote) and then call for a
> Incubator PMC VOTE on the TODO: link general incubator list.
> """
> from
>   To my eyes, that seems to suggest that the PMC vote takes place on
> the general incubator list, but that follows a vote by committers on
> the project's mailing list.
>   The main Apache voting guidelines have nothing to suggest  
> otherwise either:
> Thanks again,
>   Charles
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Jeremias Maerki < 
> > wrote:
>> I feel bad I haven't had more time to be active here. Shame on me  
>> that
>> only a release is forcing me to look into this. At some point I  
>> have to
>> bring the ImageIO wrappers I've once started to a useful state. Sigh.
>> I'm impressed by Charles' energy here. Nice work!
>> I hope you don't mind my listing a few points I noted down while  
>> looking
>> into the artifacts (some are just nits):
>> - Wow, my first Maven build that run through completely the first  
>> time! ;-)
>> - I think the artifacts should be named "apache-sanselan- 
>> incubating".
>> - The incubating disclaimer is missing:
>> - There is a "tmp" and "temp" directory in the source distribution.
>> - Why does Sanselan do a "DynamicImport" on  
>> edu.stanford.ejalbert,net.n3.nanoxml,
>> - Some of the Bundle properties in the manifest don't look quite  
>> right,
>> yet: Bundle-Description, Bundle-DocURL
>> - Javadocs in the binary dist would be nice.
>> - KEYS should probably also be included in the binary dist.
>> Otherwise, the artifacts look pretty good to me. Doesn't the vote  
>> need
>> to be on the main incubator
>> On 19.07.2008 21:16:42 Charles Matthew Chen wrote:
>>> Hello there,
>>>  I've reorganized the proposed 0.93 release of Sanselan following
>>> Craig's suggestions.  Let's put this release to a vote.
>>>  The proposed release can be found here:
>>>  Here's a summary of the reorganization that I've just done:
>>> * I've reorganized the folder structure so that it exactly matches
>>> what would be copied to
>>> * I've renamed the folders and files to conform with Apache customs.
>>> ie. the I renamed the -project files to -src.  I also removed the
>>> -incubator suffix from the files.
>>> * I've removed the extra checksum files generated by Maven.
>>> * Maven generated both a -bin distribution as well as a plain .jar.
>>> I've removed the plain jar.
>>> * I've removed the bz2-compressed distributions generated by Maven.
>>>   Also, I've attached the RAT output for the bin and src releases.
>>> RAT seems a little wary of the .txt and text-like (ie. .ppm) files  
>>> in
>>> the source distribution.
>>>   Apache's "A Guide To Release Management During Incubation" (DRAFT)
>>> has a checklist:
>>>  I believe everything on that checklist is good to go.
>>>  For the record, here's a couple more relevant links on release  
>>> voting:
>>> Charles.
>>> On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 6:43 PM, Craig L Russell < 
>>> > wrote:
>>>> Hi Charles,
>>>> I'd say it's ready for a vote, following the incubator guides for  
>>>> releases.
>>>> It would be good to post the results of the RAT run or include it  
>>>> as an
>>>> attachment to the vote message.
>>>> Also take a look at the layout of the directory under dist. If  
>>>> the idea is
>>>> to copy your dist to, you would have a  
>>>> directory
>>>> incubator/sanselan into which you would copy the 0.93 directory.
>>>> And there are lots of extra .md5 and .sha1 files (there's no need  
>>>> to
>>>> checksum signatures) that are probably the result of the maven  
>>>> plugin being
>>>> overly aggressive. They can be removed before, during, or after  
>>>> the voting
>>>> starts.
>>>> Most Apache distributions consist of .zip and .tar.gz with the  
>>>> associated
>>>> checksums and signatures. You might want to explain why you feel  
>>>> the bz2
>>>> format is needed.
>>>> Craig
>>>> On Jul 19, 2008, at 1:44 AM, Charles Matthew Chen wrote:
>>>>> What's the next step in the release process - is the proposed
>>>>> release ready to be voted on?  It is here:
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Charles.
>> Jeremias Maerki

Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System
408 276-5638
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

View raw message