shiro-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kalle Korhonen <kalle.o.korho...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Preparing for our first release
Date Fri, 21 May 2010 02:38:40 GMT
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for clarifying Craig.
> Is it common for this artifact to be auto-created during the build
> process?  Or do people simply do an SVN checkout and create a .zip
> manually?

Absolutely it's common. I think the whole remote-resources plugin was
created for that purpose.

> Kalle, what do you guys do on Tapestry and/or Tynamo?

Tapestry follows the standard Apache/Maven release process and at
Tynamo, we are lucky enough to do whatever we want :) Replying
out-of-order now, but Brian is right - except that we cannot drop the
-incubating from the version - it's dictated by the incubator rules
(there was an earlier thread on that).

Kalle


> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell
> <craig.russell@oracle.com> wrote:
>> Hi Les,
>>
>> Official release artifacts are the sources to the shiro project. The maven
>> artifacts are considered optional binary releases.
>>
>> The contents of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shiro/trunk/ which
>> contains the LICENSE and NOTICE should be tar/zipped and optionally jarred.
>> Then each of the tar/jar files should be checksummed and signed with a
>> signing key using pgp, making sure the signing key is in the KEYS file.
>>
>> You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can evaluate them,
>> like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g.
>> people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>
>>> Awesome!
>>>
>>> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
>>> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
>>> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
>>> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
>>> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
>>>
>>> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
>>> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
>>> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
>>> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
>>> ASF practice.
>>>
>>> - Les
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>> <kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
>>>>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit
in a
>>>>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>> <kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <les@hazlewood.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for
doing the
>>>>>>>> rollback!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>> <kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>> <lhazlewood@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can
you do the rollback
>>>>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm
assuming I can
>>>>>>>>>> add
>>>>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You
can fix it in
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x
branch
>>>>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>> <kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until
now and I
>>>>>>>>>>> optimistically
>>>>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it
is. Undoubtedly it's
>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one
of the strong
>>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into
it? Should be
>>>>>>>>>>> easy to
>>>>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter
to rollback the
>>>>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>> <lhazlewood@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext()
always
>>>>>>>>>>>> returning
>>>>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we
fix it quickly and
>>>>>>>>>>>> re-try?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>> <kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on
the first try. Guess I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing
with Maven along the way.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Props
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise
instructions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating.
This
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors
and send the official vote
>>>>>>>>>>>>> email
>>>>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you
want to add a bit more
>>>>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since
there were some last
>>>>>>>>>>>>> minute
>>>>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually
test the binaries before
>>>>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time
from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle
Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release
1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with
x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to
then reserve the incremental
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes
and allow using minor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases.
In essence, after releasing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development
of 1.1.0 and create
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue
feature development, bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a
feature set we don't want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or won't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which
time we'd pull a 1.1x
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development
of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les
Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <lhazlewood@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro
community would agree that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're long
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release
;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone
objects, I'm going to take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a crack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are
the most important issues that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.
 When I'm done with that, I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow
people the opportunity to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they
think should be included but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get
a little focus on what should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concretely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and
to get it out as soon as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I
think it'd be great if we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finish all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually
release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone
does not agree with this,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible
organizing the existing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> Craig L Russell
>> Architect, Oracle
>> http://db.apache.org/jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message