lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Uwe Schindler" <...@thetaphi.de>
Subject RE: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 and 2.9.1
Date Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:41:09 GMT
I got 3 binding votes from Grant, Mike, and Ted (and one from Simon, who was
a big help on Sunday evening when I created the artifacts), so I push the
maven artifacts onto the rsync repo in few minutes.

Thanks!

-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:uwe@thetaphi.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 7:03 PM
> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 and
> 2.9.1
> 
> Sorry,
> 
> I initially didn't want to start a vote, as Grant only proposed to "maybe
> start one". But nobody responded (esp. to the questions in this mail) I
> ask
> again, an I will start the vote for now.
> 
> ==========================================================================
> ==
> Please vote, that the missing artifacts for of fast-verctor-highlighter of
> Lucene Java 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 should be pushed to repoX.maven.org.
> 
> You can find the artifacts here:
> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/
> 
> This dir contains only the maven folder to be copied to maven-rsync dir on
> p.a.o. The top-level version in the maven metadata is 3.0.0, which
> conforms
> to the current state on maven (so during merging both folders during
> build,
> I set preference to metadata.xml of 3.0.0).
> 
> All files are signed by my PGP key (even the 2.9.1 ones; that release was
> originally built by Mike McCandless).
> ==========================================================================
> ==
> 
> What I additionally found out until now (because Simon nagged me):
> 
> If you compare the JAR files inside the binary ZIP file from the apache
> archive and the JAR files directly published on maven (for the other
> contribs), the MD5s/SHA1s are different even as they are created from the
> same source code (because the timestamps inside the JAR are different, for
> 2.9.1 another JDK compiler/platform was used). This interestingly does not
> apply to lucene-core.jar in 3.0. Because of that I see no problem with
> this
> maven release, even that they are not the orginal JAR files from the
> binary
> distrib.
> 
> What is not nice, is that the svn revision number in the manifest is
> different, but else is exactly the same, see my comments below in earlier
> mails about changing the ant script for showing the SVN rev of the last
> changed file.
> 
> So if nobody objects to release these rebuild jar files, all signed by my
> key, I would like to simply put them on the maven-rsync folder.
> 
> Uwe
> 
> -----
> Uwe Schindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_lucene@fucit.org]
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 6:48 PM
> > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: (NAG) Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0
> and
> > 2.9
> >
> >
> > : What to do now, any votes on adding the missing maven artifacts for
> > : fast-vector-highlighter to 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 on the apache maven
> > reposititory?
> >
> > It's not even clear to me that anything special needs to be done before
> > publishing those jars to maven.  2.9.1 and 3.0.0 were already voted on
> and
> > released -- including all of the source code in them.
> >
> > The safest bet least likely to anger the process gods is just to call a
> > vote (new thread with VOTE in the subject) and cast a vote ...
> considering
> > the sources has already been reviewed it should go pretty quick.
> >
> > :
> > : > I rebuilt the maven-dir for 2.9.1 and 3.0.0, merged them (3.0.0 is
> > top-
> > : > level
> > : > version) and extracted only fast-vector-highlighter:
> > : >
> > : > http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/
> > : >
> > : > I will copy this dir to the maven folder on people.a.o, when I got
> > votes
> > : > (how many)? At least someone should check the signatures.
> > : >
> > : > By the way, we have a small error in our ant build.xml that inserts
> > : > svnversion into the manifest file. This version is not the version
> of
> > the
> > : > last changed item (would be svnversion -c) but the current svn
> > version,
> > : > even
> > : > that I checked out the corresponding tags. It's no problem at all,
> but
> > not
> > : > very nice.
> > : >
> > : > Maybe we should change build.xml to call "svnversion -c" in future,
> to
> > get
> > : > the real number.
> > : >
> > : > Uwe
> > : >
> > : > -----
> > : > Uwe Schindler
> > : > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> > : > http://www.thetaphi.de
> > : > eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> > : >
> > : >
> > : > > -----Original Message-----
> > : > > From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsingers@apache.org]
> > : > > Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 10:26 PM
> > : > > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
> > : > > Subject: Re: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0
> and
> > 2.9
> > : > >
> > : > > I suppose we could put up the artifacts on a dev site and then we
> > could
> > : > > vote to release both of them pretty quickly.  I think that should
> be
> > : > easy
> > : > > to do, since it pretty much only involves verifying the jar and
> the
> > : > > signatures.
> > : > >
> > : > > On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Simon Willnauer wrote:
> > : > >
> > : > > > hi folks,
> > : > > > The maven artifacts for fast-vector-highlighter have never been
> > pushed
> > : > > > since it was released because there were no pom.xml.template
> > inside
> > : > > > the module. I added a pom file a day ago in the context of
> > : > > > LUCENE-2107. I already talked to uwe and grant how to deal with
> > this
> > : > > > issues and if we should push the artifact for Lucene 2.9 / 3.0.
> > Since
> > : > > > this is only a metadata file we could consider rebuilding the
> > : > > > artefacts and publish them for those releases. I can not
> remember
> > that
> > : > > > anything like that happened before, so we should discuss how to
> > deal
> > : > > > with this situation and if we should wait until 3.1.
> > : > > >
> > : > > > simon
> > : > > >
> > : > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > ---
> > : > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > : > > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> > : > > >
> > : > >
> > : > >
> > : > >
> > : > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > -
> > : > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > : > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> > : >
> > : >
> > : >
> > : > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > : > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > : > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> > :
> > :
> > :
> > : ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > : To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > : For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> > :
> >
> >
> >
> > -Hoss
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org



Mime
View raw message