taverna-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Release Candidate 5 of taverna-language-0.15.1 and taverna-osgi-0.2.1
Date Wed, 02 Mar 2016 14:13:34 GMT
RE: collecting release testing tips
I agree. I have several pages of notes, plus these emails. I thought I'd
start a wiki page, unless someone else wants to.

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016, 4:05 AM Ian Dunlop <ianwdunlop@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I think we need to capture all these tricks somewhere. Stian suggested we
> propose updating the 'official' apache release page - sounds like a good
> idea - but I think we could add it to the taverna pages first and then
> maybe send a link to it to the (I don't know) incubator list to gauge
> interest.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ian
>
> On 1 March 2016 at 22:42, Gale Naylor <GaleN@noventussolutions.com> wrote:
>
> > Thank you, Stian! Some of my questions I figured out today, but some I
> did
> > not, so I very much appreciate the hints and instructions.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 2:28 PM Stian Soiland-Reyes <stain@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for reviewing!
> > >
> > >
> > >  > (1) How do I verify that the commit id in the downloaded files
> matches
> > > that
> > > > in the VOTE email? (I've looked on the internet, but have yet to find
> > > > anything helpful.)
> > >
> > > I don't think most people check this deeply.. but I guess at least one
> > > voter should.
> > >
> > > Here's what I do:
> > >
> > > mkdir 1 ; cd 1  # new folder
> > > git clone that-repository
> > > git checkout that-commit-id-from-the-email-asdfjaskdjfsakjdfksajdf
> > > rm -rf *
> > > unzip ../the-release-candidate.zip
> > > mv apache-taverna-*/* .  (one level up)
> > > git status
> > >
> > > Git will then check the checksums of every file and let you know what
> > > has 'changed' (as it would believe you have edited it).
> > >
> > >
> > > Here's another way that doesn't require using the 'git' command:
> > >
> > > Download the git commit corresponding to the email by browsing for it
> on
> > > GitHub:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-taverna-language/tree/66866a5454ed23262c055f65155d7a195c68a17d
> > > Click "Download ZIP"
> > >
> > > mkdir 1 ; cd 1
> > > unzip ../66866a5454ed23262c055f65155d7a195c68a17d.zip
> > >
> > > cd ../ ; mkdir 2 ; cd 2
> > > unzip release-candidate.zip
> > >
> > > cd ..
> > > diff -uR 1 2
> > >
> > > The files that differ (and their differences!) will be shown.
> > >
> > > Make sure you don't have any target/ folders before diff-ing (run mvn
> > > clean to be sure)
> > >
> > > If you do the above with a git clone instead - remember that the zip
> > > doesn't include the .git/ folder - so you would have to delete the
> > > checked out .git folder before diffing.  (Don't do this on your
> > > regular checkout as you would lose all local branches!)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > (2) Are the "binary artifacts" in the target folders? Which files are
> > > > considered "binary artifacts?"
> > >
> > > Well, the target/ files are binary artifacts, but they (should) have
> > > been made by your build on your machine - not be part of the source
> > > ZIP.
> > >
> > >
> > > One thing to look out for is in the downloaded source ZIP that there
> > > are no unexpected binary artifacts in it *before you build* - e.g.
> > > there should not be any *.jars in there.  (The source distribution
> > > should be 'clean'). We do have some *expected* binaries, pictures and
> > > test workflows for instance.  As those can't have license headers they
> > > should be declared in NOTICE/LICENSE if they came from third-parties.
> > > (E.g. if we used a Creative Commons-licensed JPEG picture)
> > >
> > >
> > > In terms of release candidate, the binaries would be installers and
> > > JARs etc., under
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/taverna/binaries/
> > > (But there are none for this release candidate)
> > >
> > > ..in addition to the JARs that have been staged to the Maven repository
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetaverna-1011/org/apache/taverna/
> > >
> > >
> > > > (3) How do I verify that the build produces the binaries? By visual
> > > > inspection? What am I looking for?
> > >
> > >
> > > As for checking the Maven repository, if you want to do it really
> > > proper you should check that all the JARs that are staged can be built
> > > from the downloaded release candidate ZIP - e.g. that your target/
> > > folder contains all of the same ones.   If I do this, I do a recursive
> > > wget of the repository, and then compare the result of "find . -name
> > > '*jar'"  in the wget-tree with */*/target/*.jar.  I don't think most
> > > people do this.
> > >
> > > Paranoid-mode would be to download each JAR and check that they only
> > > have the same *.class files - but these would differ for every build
> > > and so can't be compared any further without lots of clever tooling -
> > > so nobody does this. (I think there should be an Apache-hosted tool or
> > > Maven plugin that could do this).
> > >
> > >
> > > Practically the best is just to click briefly into the repository in a
> > > browser and see there are not any 'additional' folders that shouldn't
> > > be there, e.g. we are now voting on taverna-maven-parent, taverna-osgi
> > > and taverna-language, and so we should not see
> > > org/apache/taverna/engine in there - as that is a group Id from
> > > taverna-engine.
> > >
> > > (We have already changed the groupIDs to correspond to the repository
> > > which corresponds to the release name, so at least that correspondance
> > > is easy to check on Taverna, but not so on many other projects).
> > >
> > >
> > > As binary releases from Apache Software Foundation are considered
> > > "convenience only" they are not crucial for the vote - the source
> > > release is the golden thing which everything else should be made from.
> > > Practically speaking "everyone" uses the JARs from Maven repository
> > > though, so I wouldn't dismiss them totally - at least one person in
> > > the vote should do such a check.
> > >
> > >
> > > > (4) How do I check the dependencies?
> > >
> > > mvn dependency:tree gives a nice list - but what should you check for?
> > > Well, it's mainly about licensing -
> > > http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html lists what is compatible as
> > > dependencies of an ASF release.  Now you don't need to go through the
> > > list - but sometimes there are Well Known forbidden dependencies that
> > > People (tm) recognize -e.g. mysql-connector and Hibernate are banned
> > > as they are (L)GPL.
> > >
> > > Luckily there's another Maven plugin that can do the job:
> > >
> > > mvn license:aggregate-add-third-party
> > >
> > > cat target/generated-sources/license/THIRD-PARTY.txt | sort
> > >
> > >      (Aduna BSD license) OpenRDF Sesame: HTTP client
> > > (org.openrdf.sesame:sesame-http-client:2.7.0 -
> > > http://www.openrdf.org/sesame-core/sesame-http/sesame-http-client/)
> > >      (Aduna BSD license) OpenRDF Sesame: HTTP protocol
> > > (org.openrdf.sesame:sesame-http-protocol:2.7.0 -
> > > http://www.openrdf.org/sesame-core/sesame-http/sesame-http-protocol/)
> > > (..)
> > >      (The Apache Software License, Version 2.0) Xerces2-j
> > > (xerces:xercesImpl:2.11.0 - https://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/)
> > >      (Unknown license) commons-beanutils
> > > (commons-beanutils:commons-beanutils:1.7.0 - no url defined)
> > >      (Unknown license) com.springsource.org.jaxen
> > > (org.jaxen:com.springsource.org.jaxen:1.1.1 - no url defined)
> > >      (Unknown license) com.springsource.org.jdom
> > > (org.jdom:com.springsource.org.jdom:1.1.0 - no url defined)
> > >      (Unknown license) Logging (commons-logging:commons-logging:1.0.3
> > > - http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/logging/)
> > >
> > > (BTW, those last 4 are already checked to be OK, see
> > > http://dev.mygrid.org.uk/wiki/display/developer/Third-party+licenses )
> > >
> > >
> > > > Regarding the build output: Since this is the first time I've done
> > this,
> > > I
> > > > don't know what's okay to ignore. Here is a summary of the warning
> > > messages
> > > > I received when I ran mvn clean install. I sent the output to two
> > > different
> > > > files using the following command (Windows 10/ GitBash): mvn clean
> > > install
> > > >> output1.txt 2> output2.txt. I appreciate any insight.
> > >
> > > Great!   I think those should be tracked in JIRA as we want to reduce
> > > warnings.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Generally with Maven, if it finishes with a big SUCCESS, then that's
> > > true. The warnings are more like warnings for the developers doing
> > > bad-practice-stuff than warnings about something going wrong with the
> > > build.   Often the fixes are simple, like adding a @Deprecated tag
> > > where you delibately use old APIs, or actually follow the fix
> > > suggested by the warning.
> > >
> > > I think we want to follow Andy's advice and "release early, release
> > > often" - which entails a "good enough" - not "super-perfect".
> > > Obviously each committer votes independenly by their own quality
> > > measures.
> > >
> > > While Apache Software Foundation always says that community is king -
> > > the Apache name is still recognized by the public as a kind of
> > > "quality mark" - if that is deserved or not I won't comment on, but of
> > > course there is also a sense of pride in that we don't want to set the
> > > standard too low.  :)
> > >
> > > (E.g. Taverna just cancelled 3 release candidates as they didn't pass
> > > all their tests on Windows - but the community of another Apache
> > > project might not consider Windows important enough to halt a release)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Stian Soiland-Reyes
> > > Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
> > > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
> > >
> >
>

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