On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 4:33 AM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 27/03/2008, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 9:23 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >  >
>  >  > On 3/22/08, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >  >  > On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
>  >  >  >  > On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
>  >  >  >  >
>  >  >  >  >  >  3) Announce availability of RC, publish RC-labeled jar to 
> snapshot
>  >  >  >  >  >  repo and tarballs to ~psteitz
>  >  >  >  >
>  >  >  >  >  In order for (5) to be automated with the stage plugin, you 
> would need
>  >  >  >  >  to stage each release in a separate repository.  I think that's
>  >  >  >  >  already taken care of with the proposed changes to the parent pom
>  >  >  >  >  using space under people.a.o/builds/.
>  >  >  >  >
>  >  >  >  >  (Non-snapshot artifacts shouldn't go in the snapshot repository,
>  >  >  >  >  though I'm probably responsible for starting that practice over 
> at
>  >  >  >  >  Struts a long time ago.)
>  >  >  >  >
>  >  >  >
>  >  >  > I don't see why it should be "illegal" to publish an RC to the
>  >  >  >  snapshot repo.  We do not distinguish "stable", "ga", "beta" etc 
> here
>  >  >  >  in Commons.  We have releases and things that are not yet released. 
>  I
>  >  >  >  don't see why we need yet another repo for RCs.  We - at least I -
>  >  >  >  like for people to test with our RCs *before* we vote on them.  So
>  >  >  >  maybe its just semantics and I am calling the RCs (with "RC" in the
>  >  >  >  artifact name) "snapshots."  I don't see the need to ask people to
>  >  >  >  configure yet another special repo to test our RCs.
>  >  >  >
>  >  >  <snip/>
>  >  >
>  >  >  For the style of RCs you've described, there is nothing against
>  >  >  putting them in the m2-snap-repo. But the final RC that you describe
>  >  >  is best not placed there, because:
>  >  >
>  >  >   * Fundamentally, its a (soon-to-be) release, not a snap
>  >  >   * Wendy is alluding to a limitation of the stage plugin that requires
>  >  >  the staging repo to be clean (it will currently copy all versions that
>  >  >  exist in the staging repo over to the rsync repo! -- obviously that
>  >  >  means you don't want the m2-snap-repo to also be the staging repo
>  >  >  ATM). And for folks like me who won't be correcting metadata files by
>  >  >  hand (tedious, open to operator error), the stage plugin is needed.
>  >  >
>  >  >  IMO, its not a bad idea to get folks to use an alternate repo for
>  >  >  testing RCs, it causes an increased level of awareness :-)
>  >  >
>  >
>
>  It should be obvious that code uploaded to a personal user directory
>  has not been formally released.
>
>  If a shared repository is used then this is less obvious, and there is
>  a risk that users will assume that it is a release. If a shared
>  repository is to be used for unreleased (development) code then it
>  needs to be very clearly identified as such, and the repository
>  location should not be published to users.
>
This is why I put the RCs (without final release names) for testing in
the snapshot repo, which is presented as a "development repo" and
understood by the community to hold development snapshots for
integration testing. I am OK developing another snapshot repo for RCs,
but personally don't really get the need for it, other than to make it
easier to stage releases.

Phil


>
>
>  > As long as there is a simple way for developers to test the RCs, I
>  >  will be happy. I also do not like editing the metadata files, so if we
>  >  can get the staging stuff to really work for the final release with no
>  >  fear of badness or violating the tag <-> artifact binding, I will be
>  >  happier still.  Thanks!
>  >
>  >
>  >  Phil
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >   -------------------------------------------------------------
>  >  >  To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  >  >  For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >
>  >  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >  To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  >  For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  >
>  >
>
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to