openmeetings-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Structure of binaries and sources in dist folder
Date Wed, 03 Apr 2013 06:54:13 GMT
done


On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax666@gmail.com>wrote:

> OK, so the only change I made is renaming 2.1 to be 2.1.0.
> Is this correct?
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:48 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> yes,
>>
>> sounds good. I will probably need 2-3 days to create some article, but
>> that should be fine actually.
>>
>> Sebastian
>>
>>
>> 2013/4/3 Maxim Solodovnik <solomax666@gmail.com>
>>
>>> Here is the example:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/tomcat/tomcat-7/v7.0.39/
>>> The structure is our own responsibility :)
>>> Since I need to rename 2.1 to 2.1.0 I can move source out of src as made
>>> here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/wicket/6.6.0/
>>>
>>> I'll update website and will write announce
>>>
>>> Can you write to the blog and to press@a.o ?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:21 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah,
>>>>
>>>> I did not really expect that this folder structure of the RC candidate
>>>> will be exactly the folder structure of our distribution area.
>>>>  Is there an example of any Apache Project that does organize the
>>>> sources and binaries like that?
>>>> If yes then we might be able to continue the release process.
>>>> If not we might simply change the structure and wait another 24 horus
>>>> for the mirrors to sync.
>>>>
>>>> There is also plenty of other stuff todo:
>>>>  - updating the website as soon as the mirrors have synced
>>>>  - Writing the announce message to several lists
>>>>  - catching up with the press team at press@apache.org to find out how
>>>> we can work together and provide them with nice article for our first
>>>> release
>>>>  - write a nice blog post at blogs.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> That is what comes to my mind. Actually those tasks are not all part of
>>>> the todos of the release manager. Anybody of us can take care of for
>>>> example writing the blog post.
>>>>
>>>> Sebastian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/4/3 Maxim Solodovnik <solomax666@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Sebastian,
>>>>>
>>>>> While creating file/folder structure I inspected some other projects,
>>>>> flex, wicket, tomcat, mina etc.all of them have binaries and sources
>>>>> somehow separated, I'll rename the folder in the dist as soon as we will
>>>>> agree on folder structure (was hope the structure was reviewed on release
>>>>> candidates ...) since it blocks announce (mirrors need to be synced)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 7:11 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>>>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Maxim,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> could you plz check if our binaries and sources are correctly
>>>>>> organized?
>>>>>> I am currently not sure, the other projects seem to have the
>>>>>> structure:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/binaries/
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/sources/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> while we do create a binary and source folder for each version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know this might be picky but its our first release and it is likely
>>>>>> that the conventions we make now will stay like that forever.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So are we going to create a separate folder for each release?
>>>>>> So https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.1/bin
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.2/bin
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.3/bin
>>>>>> Is that in line with the ASF docs ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The other projects seem to cut the 0 in the name of the release.
We
>>>>>> have it now with the folder name 2.1 and the package itself is called
>>>>>> 2.1.0. Please decide for either one :)
>>>>>> Either you call the folder (if there is one for each release) 2.1.0
>>>>>> and the package 2.1.0 or call the folder 2.1 and the package has
the name
>>>>>> 2.1 :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Sebastian
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Sebastian Wagner
>>>>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>>>>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>>>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>>>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> WBR
>>>>> Maxim aka solomax
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sebastian Wagner
>>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> WBR
>>> Maxim aka solomax
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sebastian Wagner
>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
>



-- 
WBR
Maxim aka solomax

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message