> Every Git code repository uses a different staging domain name +1
> The `asf-staging` should not be protected [so that CI/RM can force push] +1 > For the staging Nexus repo I would propose using a comment to close +1 > Maybe we could drop the `*-site` Git repositories except `logging-site` +999 Currently `logging-log4j-site` repository hosts the website for Log4j, Log4j Tools, Log4j Transformation, Log4j Scala, and Log4j Kotlin, even though these projects are all located in individual repositories. I cannot express how awesome it would be to move their website content to their own repositories, next to their code, where they belong. In combination with git worktrees, it will be a breeze to work in such a structure: git clone --bare g...@github.com:apache/logging-log4j2.git cd logging-log4j2.git git config remote.origin.fetch "+refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*" git worktree add ../logging-log4j2-2.x 2.x git worktree add ../logging-log4j2-main main git worktree add ../logging-log4j2-web-stg asf-staging git worktree add ../logging-log4j2-web-pro asf-site Plain beauty! On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:03 AM Piotr P. Karwasz <piotr.karw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Since now we have a fast release process It might happen (and it > already did) that the voting periods for releases will not be > disjoint. > > That is why I would like to introduce a convention on the procedure to > stage websites and Nexus repositories. > > For websites I would propose: > > 1. Every Git code repository uses a different staging domain name. > E.g. `logging-log4j2` would set: > > staging: > profile: log4j2 > > which will result in a https://logging-log4j2.staged.apache.org URI. > For the `logging-log4j-site` website repo this will also entail that > it will have multiple staging branches. > 2. The `asf-staging` should not be protected. Before staging a website > the Release Manager would perform: > > git reset --hard origin/asf-site > git push -f > > hence ensuring that moving changes from the staging branch to > `asf-site` will be usually a fast-forward and a simple cherry-pick > `origin/asf-site..asf-staging` at worst. > > For the staging Nexus repo I would propose using a comment to close > the repo in the format: > > `<code-repo-name>` version `<version_number>` RC1 > > For example Volkan used "`logging-parent` version `10.2.0` RC`" on the > 1204 repo and we can easily guess what that repo contains. ;-) > > Piotr > > PS: Maybe we could drop the `*-site` Git repositories except > `logging-site` and move their content to an `asf-site/asf-staging` > branch of the corresponding code repo.
