Thanks for getting us ready for the first release, Davor! We would like to fix BEAM-315 next week. Is there already a timeline for the first release? If so, we could also address this in a minor release. Releasing often will give us some experience with our release process :)
I would like everyone to think about the artifact names and group ids again. "parent" and "flink" are not very suitable names for the Beam parent or the Flink Runner artifact (same goes for the Spark Runner). I'd prefer "beam-parent", "flink-runner", and "spark-runner" as artifact ids. One might think of Maven GroupIds as a sort of hierarchy but they're not. They're just an identifier. Renaming the parent pom to "apache-beam" or "beam-parent" would give us the old naming scheme which used flat group ids (before [1]). In the end, I guess it doesn't matter too much if we document the naming schemes accordingly. What matters is that we use a consistent naming scheme. Cheers, Max [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-287 On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > Actually, I think we can fix both issue in one commit. > > What do you think about renaming the main parent POM with: > groupId: org.apache.beam > artifactId: apache-beam > > ? > > Thanks to that, the source distribution will be named > apache-beam-xxx-sources.zip and it would be clearer to dev. > > Thoughts ? > > Regards > JB > > > On 06/02/2016 03:10 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >> >> Another annoying thing is the main parent POM artifactId. >> >> Now, it's just "parent". What do you think about renaming to >> "beam-parent" ? >> >> Regarding the source distribution name, I would cancel this staging to >> fix that (I will have a PR ready soon). >> >> Thoughts ? >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On 06/02/2016 03:46 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: >>> >>> Hi everyone! >>> We've started the release process for our first release, >>> 0.1.0-incubating. >>> >>> To recap previous discussions, we don't have particular functional goals >>> for this release. Instead, we'd like to make available what's >>> currently in >>> the repository, as well as work through the release process. >>> >>> With this in mind, we've: >>> * branched off the release branch [1] at master's commit 8485272, >>> * updated master to prepare for the second release, 0.2.0-incubating, >>> * built the first release candidate, RC1, and deployed it to a staging >>> repository [2]. >>> >>> We are not ready to start a vote just yet -- we've already identified >>> a few >>> issues worth fixing. That said, I'd like to invite everybody to take a >>> peek >>> and comment. I'm hoping we can address as many issues as possible >>> before we >>> start the voting process. >>> >>> Please let us know if you see any issues. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Davor >>> >>> [1] >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam/tree/release-0.1.0-incubating >>> [2] >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1000/ >>> >> > > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > jbono...@apache.org > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com
