shiro-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Les Hazlewood <lhazlew...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Preparing for our first release
Date Fri, 21 May 2010 07:06:18 GMT
Hi Crag,

I wasn't thinking it would be part of the maven repo directly, but it
is nicely packaged up there:

https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/org/apache/shiro/shiro-root/1.0.0-incubating/

You'll see the .zip and its signatures and checksums.

Cheers,

Les

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Craig L Russell
<craig.russell@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> On May 20, 2010, at 7:32 PM, Kalle Korhonen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell
>> <craig.russell@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> That's exactly what the staging repository is for.
>
> Except that I didn't see anything in the staging repo that looks like a
> gzip/jar with checksums and signatures. Maybe you can point it out to me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Craig
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>>> 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!
>>>
>>>
>
> 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