Done. I'll add a note on the "release notes" ticket I started for this.
On 10/19/13 1:57 PM, Christopher wrote:
As a test, would you mind replacing the lightweight tag with a GPG
signed tag? (like an annotated tag, but with -s instead of -a). I'm
thinking we should be doing that for all our release tags, and this is
a good opportunity to try it out on a sub-project first.
--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:23 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote:
Finally getting around to closing this. Ultimately passes with 4 +1's
On 10/15/2013 3:59 PM, Christopher wrote:
If you need another vote, you can have my +1
I verified:
* good GPG sigs, sha1s, md5s
* source tarball and zip match git tag (except generated DEPENDENCIES
file, which is okay)
* HEAD of tag matches specified commit sha1
* tag builds reproducibly (mvn verify -P apache-release)
* can create new project from archetype in staging repo
* created project can build (mvn verify)
* created project can run MapReduce and shell commands in README
* no obvious problems in POM
* contents of jar files look fine
Encountered issues (not serious, can be improved in future releases or
not at all):
* not sure tarLongFileMode=gnu worked (file *.tar.gz still reports it
as "gzip compressed data, from FAT filesystem")
* unit test that starts mini should be IT instead
--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote:
Ok, I apparently shouldn't have taken Mike's word as gospel :)
<profile>
<id>instamo-staging</id>
<repositories>
<repository>
<id>instamo</id>
<name>ASF staging repo</name>
<url>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheaccumulo-156/</url>
<layout>default</layout>
</repository>
</repositories>
</profile>
in my settings.xml, and invoking
mvn -Pinstamo-staging archetype:generate
-DarchetypeArtifactId=accumulo-instamo-archetype -DarchetypeVersion=1.4.4
-DarchetypeGroupId=org.apache.accumulo
Worked for me. Can someone else verify please? I "technically" never
closed
the vote (I guess?), so I change my -1 to a +1. I'd still like to get
another vote from the community though to make sure it's kosher.
On 10/14/13 11:19 AM, Josh Elser wrote:
Yah, I agree.
If it comes down to having to write something else just to get what we
want to begin with (one-command install), we should just do it
correctly.
Self -1
On 10/14/2013 11:15 AM, Michael Berman wrote:
One of the big advantages of an archetype is that it's convenient and
consistent to use...I agree that requiring a download and install in
order
to use the archetype really cuts down on its usefulness. I don't get a
vote, but if I did, I think I would need a clean invocation path in
order
to give my +1. (And I don't think a custom one-off shell script that
messes with someone's local repo would qualify)
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Mike Drob <[email protected]> wrote:
On Oct 14, 2013 12:14 AM, "Josh Elser" <[email protected]> wrote:
Well, dang.
My intent was definitely to *not* make a user have to download,
install
and then invoke the archetype, but provide a single maven command to
be run
to get up and running.
Could wrap this up in a shell script? Installing to the local
repo/catalog
is a pretty nasty side effect though.
I hate doing it, but that might be a non-starter (even as the guy
repeatedly cutting these releases). I haven't decided my opinion on
whether
or not this is super important for a 1.4.x version of the code.
Thanks for
the information either way, Mike.
On 10/13/2013 12:29 AM, Mike Drob wrote:
There is no archetype-catalog.xml file deployed, so I have to mvn
install
before I am able to generate projects using the archetype. After I
install
however, everything works fine.
