Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-dev-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 44370 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2007 19:11:16 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Jan 2007 19:11:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 93387 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jan 2007 19:11:22 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 93371 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jan 2007 19:11:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact solr-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list solr-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 93362 invoked by uid 99); 24 Jan 2007 19:11:21 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:11:21 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of yseeley@gmail.com designates 66.249.92.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [66.249.92.175] (HELO ug-out-1314.google.com) (66.249.92.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:11:13 -0800 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id k40so254088ugc for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:10:51 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=hu19vHaKLSKk7WT3mg7CmXDRs0IKcysqwVw0YdGXTI2N6zVwz1hlNl+s8B8mllksWoeqbUsaT96F6xIcy7Hu9I3iQuA8BihzGpnLOSJBeP9/eCZn1KZ2gxqdh3xmm9pv7/vQ1yY7Xziy3ku0k7EMP4XqTAxrO7uvkLA7cPFkHeE= Received: by 10.82.162.14 with SMTP id k14mr382489bue.1169665850860; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:10:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.106.19 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:10:50 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:10:50 -0500 From: "Yonik Seeley" Sender: yseeley@gmail.com To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: solrb releases In-Reply-To: <44D1697C-2398-4D91-B587-1FC82D1C8DE9@ehatchersolutions.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <44D1697C-2398-4D91-B587-1FC82D1C8DE9@ehatchersolutions.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 3b8be6838247a1df X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 1/24/07, Erik Hatcher wrote: > On Jan 24, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > > > On 1/24/07, Erik Hatcher wrote: > > > >> ...Yonik/Hoss, others - what do you think should be done to make > >> releases?... > > > > If you mean an actual release (defined in [1] as "any publication > > outside the group of people on the product dev list"), the PMC must > > vote to approve it, and it must comply with the ASF licensing > > requirements (LICENSE and NOTICE files, etc). And it should be > > mirrored, dunno how this would work for Ruby packages? So some > > bureaucracy would be involved I guess. > > > > Release candidates are much more lightweight according to [1]. IIUC, > > putting up a gem package as you mention fits that definition, so that > > might be a good way of getting your stuff tested. > > Yes, definitely this is a "release candidate". Thanks for the info. > I'll review the link you sent and update the codebase with any > missing pieces, and any other recommendations on this thread before > "releasing". I would think we could set up a nightly build to go to people.apache.org/builds/lucene/solr/solrb/nightly and perhaps release candidates could go in people.apache.org/builds/lucene/solr/solrb/ -Yonik