2007/6/25, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 6/25/07, Mark Hindess wrote:
>
> On 25 June 2007 at 13:59, "Stepan Mishura" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 6/24/07, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > We have passed our code freeze date for M2
> > >
> >
> > Mikhail,
> >
> > Just to be clear - M1 milestone published snapshots include build for
> > Windows x86, Linux (libstdc++ v5 and libstdc++ v6) x86 and Windows
> > x86_64.
>
> Do you think it would be possible to produce source snapshots? The
> Apache release FAQ (at http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html ) says:
>
> The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
> releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
> changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/bytecode
> packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might
> not have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the
> source. In all such cases, the binary/bytecode package must have
> the same version number as the source release and may only add
> binary/bytecode files that are the result of compiling that version of
> the source code release.
>
> Currently binaries are our primary artifact. I appreciated that it may
> be a little late to try to correct this for this release, but I think it
> is important that we try to correct this before we get too comfortable
> with the current release process.
>
I'd suggest to switch to using source snapshots right after M2.
> It should now be possible to do:
>
> ant bundle_src
> mkdir /tmp/build
> tar -C /tmp/build -xzf target/apache-harmony-src-r550411-snapshot.tar.gz
> cd /tmp/build/harmony-src-550411
> ant -Dauto.fetch=true
>
> which would seem to me to be more in-keeping with the Apache release
> guidelines.
>
> On this subject, I'd like to permission to commit a patch to correct the
> top-level directory name in the source tar.gz/zip files from:
>
> harmony-src-550411
>
> to:
>
> apache-harmony-src-r550411
>
I'm OK with it.
will it require rebuild of the release candidate?
Thanks,
Mikhail
Thanks,
Stepan.
> The format of the archive names changed over time and these have become
> inconsistent.
>
> Regards,
> Mark.
>
> > I assume that we still aimed to x86 architecture and I need to build
> > milestone candidates for:
> > - Windows x86
> > - Linux x86. BWT, again for both libstdc++ versions?
> >
> > And what about x86_64?
> >
> > As I said M1 includes Windows x86_64. Should we publish them to let
> > the community test them to see how good they are?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Stepan.
