Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 1142 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2010 20:45:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 18 Sep 2010 20:45:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 17333 invoked by uid 500); 18 Sep 2010 20:45:38 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 17274 invoked by uid 500); 18 Sep 2010 20:45:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 17267 invoked by uid 99); 18 Sep 2010 20:45:38 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 18 Sep 2010 20:45:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jason.rutherglen@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.169 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.216.169] (HELO mail-qy0-f169.google.com) (209.85.216.169) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 18 Sep 2010 20:45:31 +0000 Received: by qyk8 with SMTP id 8so2224900qyk.14 for ; Sat, 18 Sep 2010 13:45:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=j+fmAFY4CyfLuD6Fv5n/5j3NFNrA2Lp8TW1BQ4shaG4=; b=CZAXV/44w/j/cCwv83yNBok0w5Cl6lVSgkGfGD/PkLSR5EvcL7Bu9YsufBHnJV4isZ r73B2mIJusrEfWGWGyRZ9vwxGyXzIHd5TwRhBP29+GJ/7VB9BNu8MF7AwEqgs0k8/Iji uA/47uHTHNcOnd5zBGhvD4SMqfOUq4xvhlye0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=eUoaR732IdP+pjVgspxh9KXLhRmg6LtdhCXILhqAqCpWMJ2zdCsiNWd7lIyHVADLMO 8B6Ibl0eajDFfb6HgkTZSaQI5fiGfvD2oWZHrrk6Qgyoabs4YNZO4fD+7XG9xUipWwG9 UcJpWhCzOLdyJLq7U0iAXyRPZ1D0/Fygh1W+8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.117.136 with SMTP id r8mr4526640qcq.201.1284842710235; Sat, 18 Sep 2010 13:45:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.181.199 with HTTP; Sat, 18 Sep 2010 13:45:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4C9427DC.1040003@gmail.com> <4C94F32E.4000705@gmail.com> <4C9509D4.8030301@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 16:45:10 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: discussion about release frequency. From: Jason Rutherglen To: dev@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > the maven stuff in 3.x/trunk is actually pretty good I've heard that about every release of Maven, and any time I've tried to use it, it doesn't quite work as expected, and given what it does should be fairly trivial, the fact that there bugs/issues, and it's been released to me has meant I don't want to use it. It's like a toaster that also plays videos, I just want a toaster, thanks. On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote: > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Robert Muir wrote: >> >> >> On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Mark Miller wro= te: >>> >>> Well, you have always claimed that as de jure, I think defacto is that >>> it's part of the release. And the defacto is to follow the 'release to >>> do' best as makes sense (I'm not sure the Solr release to do wiki alway= s >>> makes much sense). I've been waiting for the day that you release Lucen= e >>> and drop all consideration for Maven as you have said you would likely >>> do - but I think most of us feel it's pretty much on the list and this >>> general agreement will free us of our conscious. I was ready to follow >>> your coat tails to freedom, but this way lets me off easier I think. >>> >> >> Just my opinion: (personally i do not use maven, nor understand it). >> If maven support is beneficial to bringing more devs to lucene, we shoul= d >> consider what we can do. >> But at the same time, perhaps Makefiles would bring more devs, too. >> My problem with releasing with maven is that i could not honestly even += 1 my >> own release artifacts, because i don't know what the hell is going on wi= th >> the maven artifacts. >> There has to be a way to let the "maven experts" take care of this stuff >> somehow, if its really going to be beneficial. > > As a maven user (not an expert by any means), the maven stuff in > 3.x/trunk is actually pretty good. =A0Running: > =A0ant generate-maven-artifacts -Dmaven.dist.dir=3Dmaven -Dversion=3D4.0.= rxxx > makes a folder (maven) with everything it needs. =A0This is *very* easy > for maven apps to test against. > > What are the deploy steps that we are talking about dropping/changing? > > > - - - - > > As an aside, I still think it is worth changing our dev builds from > "-dev.jar" to "-SNAPSHOT.jar" so that the daily builds are > automatically valid SNAPSHOT builds that are easy for maven/ivy users > to work with. =A0(LUCENE-2493) =A0As is, maven users have to checkout and > build with a special version to test/use a dev build -- since this is > more work then many people want to deal with, we find problems with > the maven pom files *after* the official release. > > > ryan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org