On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Stephen Connolly
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Well look all we need to do is say that for pom releases the vote can
> be as short as getting 3 binding +1's and it can be guillotined once
> those three binding +1's have been cast. That could give you the
> release in short time. In any case you cannot commit to the next
> release version without fear of breakage until you have confirmed that
> the pom has been pushed to central, which is every 8 hours IIRC

Unless we made use of a 'mirror trick'? I'm not sure that the
following hangs together. What if there was a repo group for us at
repository.apache.org that aggregated the staging repos for a flock of
pom changes, and maven developers knew where to find a settings.xml
with a mirror-of-* (to avoid adding <repository> elements to poms)
that searched it in place of central? Then a releaser of the flock
could stage the first, commit to it, stage the second ..., and then
call a vote. (Except that this would require 'open' staging repos to
be visible, which I fear that they are not?)


>
> On 17 August 2011 16:28, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Maybe I'm missing something, but why you cannot checkin the upgrade to the 
>>> non-yet-released parent? Ok, our ITs would be broken, but else?
>>
>> Not only the ITs, but the private builds of everyone who does an svn
>> up between the checkin and the promotion. No?
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Devs of course should test the new parent upgrade anyway, so the build is 
>>> not accidentally 'broken'.
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>> --- On Wed, 8/17/11, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Benson Margulies <[email protected]>
>>>> Subject: Re: Must a pom release be an ASF release?
>>>> To: "Maven Developers List" <[email protected]>
>>>> Date: Wednesday, August 17, 2011, 3:05 PM
>>>> I don't see how. If I want to change
>>>> the plugins parent to refer to a
>>>> new version of the global maven parent, I can't even check
>>>> in that
>>>> change to svn until the new global parent is deployed to a
>>>> repository.
>>>> Now, we might imagine using an extra repository for this, I
>>>> guess ...
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > But we can do this all in one go, isn't?
>>>> >
>>>> > Just stage the projects locally and call Votes which
>>>> are depending on each other.
>>>> >
>>>> > LieGrue,
>>>> > strub
>>>> >
>>>> > --- On Wed, 8/17/11, Benson Margulies <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> From: Benson Margulies <[email protected]>
>>>> >> Subject: Re: Must a pom release be an ASF
>>>> release?
>>>> >> To: "Maven Developers List" <[email protected]>
>>>> >> Date: Wednesday, August 17, 2011, 2:56 PM
>>>> >> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 10:45 AM,
>>>> >> Brian Fox <[email protected]>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >> > Benson, what problem exactly are you trying
>>>> to solve
>>>> >> here?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 1) If you want to make a set of coordinated
>>>> changes up the
>>>> >> chain of
>>>> >> poms, it's extremely time-consuming, with a 3-day
>>>> vote at
>>>> >> each step.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 2) Our automated builds break during the 3-day
>>>> window.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Benson
>>>> Margulies
>>>> >> <[email protected]>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >> >> This tees off of a remark in the recent
>>>> vote
>>>> >> thread about the
>>>> >> >> disruption to CI of pom releases.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> I don't believe that we need the full ASF
>>>> release
>>>> >> voting process for
>>>> >> >> our internal shared POMs.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> I reason as follows:
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> The Apache release process creates a
>>>> particular
>>>> >> legal status for a
>>>> >> >> body of code. This has certain advantages
>>>> for
>>>> >> users and developers.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> However, that assumes that there are
>>>> users!
>>>> >> However, these POMs are
>>>> >> >> not intended for use by anything except
>>>> other
>>>> >> pieces of Maven (the
>>>> >> >> global ASF pom might be an exception).
>>>> Thus, they
>>>> >> should be viewed as
>>>> >> >> part of the releases of Maven itself and
>>>> the
>>>> >> components and plugins,
>>>> >> >> not as independent releases.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> To build any of our user-visible
>>>> components from
>>>> >> source, you need to
>>>> >> >> use the right parent POM (give our take
>>>> our friend
>>>> >> at Gentoo).
>>>> >> >> Arguably, what we need here is a tweak to
>>>> the
>>>> >> source plugin, or some
>>>> >> >> other plugin, that could sweep the chain
>>>> of
>>>> >> parents into 'the
>>>> >> >> release', or at least enumerate them. We
>>>> could
>>>> >> then argue that,
>>>> >> >> maven-release-plugin aside, the shared
>>>> poms are
>>>> >> formally 'released'
>>>> >> >> when the components that use them are
>>>> releases.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> If this argument holds water, the shared
>>>> poms
>>>> >> could be pushed via the
>>>> >> >> maven-release-plugin via lazy consensus,
>>>> and the
>>>> >> CI problems go away.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> >> >> 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]
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to