On 20 January 2016 at 15:16, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 01/20/2016 07:26 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote: >> +1 for the version change...I've always used X.X.0-SNAPSHOT and not >> X.X-SNAPSHOT for development versions so this makes sense to me. >> >> I can change the current 5.14-SNAPSHOT to 5.14.0-SNAPSHOT if no one has any >> complaints. >> >> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 01/19/2016 04:34 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote: >>>> On 18 January 2016 at 18:46, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>> On 18 January 2016 at 15:53, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> We seem to have a bit of a mess in our snapshots area with lots of old >>>>>> snapshots for ancient releases like 5.3, 5.4, etc along with snapshots >>>>>> for an ActiveMQ 6.0.0 release that has caused some confusion recently. >>>>>> >>>>>> Some examples of old snapshots or snapshot to things that were never >>>>>> released. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/activemq/activemq-aerogear-integration/ >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/activemq/activemq-all/ >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/activemq/activemq-book/ >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/activemq/activemq-bootstrap/ >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/activemq/activemq-core-client/ >>>>>> We can request that infra wipe out the snapshots area and let the >>>>>> jenkins runs repopulate with only the current builds for active project >>>>>> work. Alternatively we can go through every folder and audit them but >>>>>> given they are snapshots it's simpler just to blow them all away. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Tim Bish >>>>>> twitter: @tabish121 >>>>>> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Cleaning things up would definitely be good. Given the sizable amount >>>>> of cruft I dont think it makes sense to try pruning them individually, >>>>> and I'm not sure infra would be particularly happy at being asked that >>>>> either hehe, so the full wipe seems like the way to go to me. >>>>> >>>>> Robbie >>>> To add to that... >>>> >>>> Old snapshots normally get cleaned up once a release occurs but this >>>> isn't happening for the ActiveMQ 5.X bits, which is why all those old >>>> bits are still there. The reason is likely that the snapshot versions >>>> dont align with the end release version used, as the snapshots are >>>> using 5.X-SNAPSHOT but the released bits then actually use 5.X.0, and >>>> so the cleanup process isn't able to recognise that the snapshots have >>>> become stale artifacts following a release. >>>> >>>> We should probably also change to using 5.X.0-SNAPSHOT on master >>>> (before asking infra to nuke the snapshot repo) to prevent more cruft >>>> accumulating again with each future release. >>>> >>>> Robbie >>>> >>> Exactly. Hadn't gotten around to typing that up yet, thanks for saving >>> me some work Robbie :) >>> >>> -- >>> Tim Bish >>> twitter: @tabish121 >>> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ >>> >>> > We should move all the maintained branches to the correct version > numbering anyway so future releases purge their snapshots from the repo, > so master, 5.13.x etc >
Yep. Looks like master is the only culprit at the moment. Shall we just go ahead and update it to 5.14.0-SNAPSHOT then? No objections raised here so far. I doubt too many folks will be depending on the old version, but updating from a given snapshot version to another version (release or otherwise) is generally to be expected if you are anyway. Robbie
