+1 then. Thanks for the detailed explanation and links. It will be great to start using these and gaining experience with the vendored artifacts.
Kenn On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 11:27 AM Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: > I also looked for documentation as to how this information is used but > couldn't find anything beyond configuring the Maven archive plugin[1]. > > These seem to be benign since we have been publishing them with > beam-sdks-java-core since at least the 2.0.0 release[2]. > > I believe these files appear because by default the Maven shade plugin and > Gradle shadow plugin merge the contents of META-INF/ across all jar files. > > 1: https://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-archive-configuration.html > 2: > http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/beam/beam-sdks-java-core/2.0.0/beam-sdks-java-core-2.0.0.jar > > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 10:35 AM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I notice in the vendored Guava jar there is: >> >> META-INF/maven/com.google.guava/guava/pom.xml >> META-INF/maven/com.google.guava/guava/pom.properties >> >> Are these expected? If not, are they benign? I haven't found any >> documentation for what these contents actually mean or do. >> >> There are many more in the gRPC META-INF/maven folder, but I don't have >> familiarity with what is expected for that one. >> >> Kenn >> >> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 10:15 AM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> It would be nice to have a build task that allows to create the source >>> artifacts locally, if we cannot publish them. >>> >>> +1 for the release >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 7:48 AM Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I have been relying on the Intellij's ability to decompile the class >>>> files, its not as good as the original source for sure. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 3:26 AM Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> We decided not to publish source files for now. The main reason are >>>>> possible legal issues with publishing relocated source code. >>>>> >>>>> On 16.11.18 05:24, Thomas Weise wrote: >>>>> > Thanks for driving this. Did we reach a conclusion regarding >>>>> publishing >>>>> > relocated source artifacts? Debugging would be painful without >>>>> (unless >>>>> > manually installed in the local repo). >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 6:05 PM Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com >>>>> > <mailto:lc...@google.com>> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the >>>>> vendored >>>>> > artifacts gRPC 1.13.1 and Guava 20.0: >>>>> > [ ] +1, Approve the release >>>>> > [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific >>>>> comments) >>>>> > >>>>> > The creation of these artifacts are the outcome of the discussion >>>>> > about vendoring[1]. >>>>> > >>>>> > The complete staging area is available for your review, which >>>>> includes: >>>>> > * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository >>>>> [2], >>>>> > * commit hash "3678d403fcfea6a3994d7b86cfe6db70039087b0" [3], >>>>> > * Java artifacts were built with Gradle 4.10.2 and OpenJDK >>>>> 1.8.0_161 >>>>> > * artifacts which are signed with the key with fingerprint >>>>> > EAD5DE293F4A03DD2E77565589E68A56E371CCA2 [4] >>>>> > >>>>> > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by >>>>> > majority approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes. >>>>> > >>>>> > Thanks, >>>>> > Luke >>>>> > >>>>> > [1] >>>>> > >>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4c12db35b40a6d56e170cd6fc8bb0ac4c43a99aa3cb7dbae54176815@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>> > [2] >>>>> > >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1052 >>>>> > [3] >>>>> > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/3678d403fcfea6a3994d7b86cfe6db70039087b0 >>>>> > [4] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>
