On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 4:22 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 14/05/2010, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 11:19 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On 13/05/2010, Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 17:55 +0100, sebb wrote: >> >> > On 13/05/2010, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 4:49 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > This is actually quite easy, see >> >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMMONSSITE-55 >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > Thanks for the pointer, i didn't know you could do use a file url in >> >> > > altDeploymentRepository. >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > BTW, you can also add the profile to your local settings.xml. >> >> > >> >> > Though if many people may want to use the same method, it is more >> >> > efficient to add it to a shared resource such a a parent pom. >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> This approach results in corrupt / inconsistent maven metadata >> >> (maven-metadata.xml) unless the metadata is manually copied over. >> >> >> > >> > This is what the Apache Nexus repo is for, see: >> > >> > http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html >> > >> > [As far as I can tell, one can use deploy to upload to the repo if one >> > does not use the release plugin.] >> > >> > PMC then votes on the repo contents, which are then either promoted or >> dropped. >> > >> > == >> > >> > Note that I raised the issue of whether Maven sources need to be voted >> > on with the board/infrastructure. >> > >> > All the responses say that Maven source packages need to be voted on >> > by the PMC, and this is supported by the updated releases FAQ at: >> > >> > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html >> > >> > This also requires jars etc. to have N&L files, which implies that the >> > Maven artifacts also need to be reviewed. >> > >> > Voting on source releases is not an issue that is decided by PMCs; it >> > is mandated by the ASF. >> > >> >> Oleg >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@hc.apache.org >> >> >> >> >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@hc.apache.org >> > >> > >> >> >> Sebb, there is a source release that we're voting on, so, >> respectfully, i don't think this is an issue. I'm on the board and >> infrastructure lists so have seen the discussion you mention. The key >> point is that all ASF releases must include a source release and any >> other binary artifacts are an optional convenience. > > Here, I entirely agree - I have no problem with the source and binary > archives being released to the ASF Mirror system once the PMC has > approved it. > >> The issue with the Maven artifacts requiring source artifacts came >> from projects that were doing pure Maven artifact only releases where >> the jars in the Maven repository did not have an associated source >> release so there was no way to recreate the Maven artifact jars from >> the release. Thats not the case here as there is a source release and >> building that creates all the Maven artifacts, so it does not matter >> whether or not those individual Maven artifact jars themselves have >> associated source artifacts. > > However, I do have a problem with not submitting the Maven artifacts for a > vote. > > The artifacts are a formal release, and therefore must be approved by the PMC. > > They contain source files, and my reading of the FAQ says that source > releases must be voted on. >
Well, i think that can depend on how you look at them - just because they contain source does not make them a or the source release. The canonical source release is the httpcomponents-client-4.1-alpha2-src.zip/tar.gz, all the binary artifacts are generated from that and things like httpclient-4.1-alpha2-sources.jar are just one of the optional generated artifacts. > Also, the Release FAQ makes demands on the contents of all releases. > Regardless of the requirement to vote on the sources, it seems to me > that the best way to check that these requirements are met is to put > the artifacts up for inspection by the PMC. > Sure i don't actually disagree but i don't think getting that to happen needs to delay or block release votes until its done, someone needs to go work it all out and set it up and document the new release process which works with out complexity, and if if that happens I expect people would use it. ...ant --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@hc.apache.org
