Hello there, when. respinning a release it would of help IMO instead of deleting the tag to rename it to e.g. maven-javadoc-plugin-2.9-rc1 using "svn mv".
By means of this you are able to easily diff between e.g. released 2.8 and the final 2.9 as well as between 2.9-rc1 and the final 2.9. Regards Mirko -- Sent from my mobile On Jun 26, 2013 12:14 PM, "sebb" <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 26 June 2013 10:56, Chris Graham <chrisgw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:06 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I meant: if the pom is created with the correct final URLs in the > >> first place, it won't have to be changed. > >> > >> > > They are. If you'd used the release plugin, then you would have seen > this. > > > > I was responding to this: > > >>> > On 26 June 2013 01:04, Chris Graham <chrisgw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > -1 > > Except then the poms will point to the wrong place. > <<< > > but maybe I misunderstood. > > > > >> It might need a tweak to the appropriate plugin, but it's not > >> impossible to achieve. > >> > > > > You've not clearly stated what it is that you actually intend to achieve. > > I thought I stated that clearly in my original post at the start of this > thread. > > > > >> The same process would work with the system used by Lucene. > >> > >> No, it wouldn't. From my reading of that email, there appeared to be far > > more manual steps involved, and probably a far larger time window > involved > > as well. But I'd have to grok it a little more to be sure. > > > > > >> > >> > > On 26 June 2013 06:48, Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr> wrote: > >> > the jar content isn't updated: so you have jar artifacts inconsistent > >> with svn > >> > > >> > Le mercredi 26 juin 2013 01:08:59 sebb a écrit : > >> >> On 26 June 2013 01:04, Chris Graham <chrisgw...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > -1 > >> >> > Except then the poms will point to the wrong place. > >> >> > >> >> Depends how the poms are updated. > >> >> > >> >> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Gary Gregory > >> > <garydgreg...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 7:14 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> > It would be a lot better to use RC1 RC2 etc initially, and copy > the > >> >> >> > successful tag to the GA tag. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> +1 ! :) > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Gary > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On 25 June 2013 19:38, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > >> wrote: > >> >> >> > > Yeah - I agree with this. I rename them to rc1, rc2, etc > after a > >> >> >> > >> >> >> failed > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > release vote instead of deleting them. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:23 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > >> >> >> > >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Ralph Goers < > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>wrote: > >> >> >> > >>> Again I have to disagree. The release manager will send an > >> email > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > closing > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>> the prior release. At this point all the prior release > >> artifacts > >> >> >> > >>> are > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > junk > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>> even if they still exist. At some point the release manager > >> will > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > delete > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>> the tag and rerun the release. > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> > >> That's a no-no IMO. Tags that have been voted on should > never be > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > deleted. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> Gary > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> > >>> At this point the tag is still junk to everyone else because > >> they > >> >> >> > >> >> >> have > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > no > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>> idea what the RM is doing - so they shouldn't be making > >> assumptions > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > about > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>> non-released tags. Once he sends the email though the tag > >> will be > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > valid. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>> Sure having the revision number helps but unless the RM > >> completely > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > screws > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>> up the tag should be sufficient. > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>> Ralph > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>> On Jun 25, 2013, at 10:58 AM, Fred Cooke wrote: > >> >> >> > >>>> Not really, no. The developer may have re-spun it again > and be > >> >> >> > >>>> about > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > to > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>> email again. You have no idea what you're looking at unless > >> you > >> >> >> > >>>> know > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > the > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>> revision. SVN will die off within a decade and this > discussion > >> >> >> > >>>> will > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>> become > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>>> critical. Better to figure out how to support proper > >> techniques > >> >> >> > >>>> now, > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>> rather > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>>> than wait until forced to. > >> >> >> > >>>> > >> >> >> > >>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Ralph Goers < > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>> wrote: > >> >> >> > >>>>> I disagree that the revision is required. I know that the > >> RM is > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > going > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>> to > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>>>> recreate the tag with each release candidate. Therefore, > so > >> long > >> >> >> > >> >> >> as > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>>> refetch that tag for every release vote I can be confident > >> that I > >> >> >> > >> >> >> am > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >>>>> reviewing the release contents. > >> >> >> > >>>>> > >> >> >> > >>>>> Ralph > >> >> >> > >>>>> > >> >> >> > >>>>> On Jun 25, 2013, at 9:52 AM, sebb wrote: > >> >> >> > >>>>>> The mission of the ASF is to release software as source, > >> and to > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > ensure > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>>>> that the released source is available under the Apache > >> Licence. > >> >> >> > >>>>>> > >> >> >> > >>>>>> Before a release can be approved it must be voted on by > the > >> PMC. > >> >> >> > >>>>>> The review process needs to establish that the proposed > >> source > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > release > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>>>> meets those aims. > >> >> >> > >>>>>> > >> >> >> > >>>>>> It's all but impossible for reviewers to examine every > >> single > >> >> >> > >>>>>> file > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > in > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>>>> a source archive to determine if it meets the criteria. > >> >> >> > >>>>>> And it's not unknown for spurious files to creep into a > >> release > >> >> >> > >>>>>> (perhaps from a stale workspace - are releases always > built > >> from > >> >> >> > >>>>>> a > >> >> >> > >>>>>> fresh checkout of the tag?) > >> >> >> > >>>>>> > >> >> >> > >>>>>> However, PMCs are also required to check what is added to > >> the > >> >> >> > >>>>>> SCM > >> >> >> > >>>>>> (SVN/Git) to make sure it meets the required license > >> criteria. > >> >> >> > >>>>>> This is done on an ongoing basis as part of reviewing > >> check-ins > >> >> >> > >> >> >> and > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >>>>>> accepting new contributions. > >> >> >> > >>>>>> So provided that all the files in the source release are > >> also > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > present > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>>>> in SCM, the PMC can be reasonably sure that the source > >> release > >> >> >> > >> >> >> meets > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >>>>>> the ASF criteria. > >> >> >> > >>>>>> > >> >> >> > >>>>>> Without having the SCM as a database of validated files, > >> there > >> >> >> > >>>>>> are > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > far > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>>>> too many files in the average source archive to check > >> >> >> > >> >> >> individually. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >>>>>> And how would one check their provenance? The obvious way > >> is to > >> >> >> > >>>>>> compare them with the entries in SCM. > >> >> >> > >>>>>> > >> >> >> > >>>>>> Therefore, I contend that a release vote does not make > sense > >> >> >> > >> >> >> without > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >>>>>> the SCM tag. > >> >> >> > >>>>>> In the case of SVN, since tags are not immutable, the > vote > >> >> >> > >>>>>> e-mail > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > also > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>>>> needs the revision. > >> >> >> > >>>>>> > >> >> >> > >>>>>> Whether every reviewer actually checks the source archive > >> >> >> > >>>>>> against > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > SCM > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>>>> is another matter. > >> >> >> > >>>>>> But if the required SCM information is not present, it > >> would be > >> >> >> > >>>>>> difficult to argue that the RM had provided sufficient > >> >> >> > >>>>>> information > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > for > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>>>> a valid review to take place. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> >> >> > >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: > dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> >> >> > >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: > dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> >> > >>> -- > >> >> >> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> >> >> > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> > >> -- > >> >> >> > >> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > >> >> >> > >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition< > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition < > >> http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> > >> >> >> > >> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > >> >> >> > >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > >> >> >> > >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ > >> >> >> > >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> >> >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> >> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> >> >> > >> >> >> -- > >> >> >> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > >> >> >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition< > >> >> >> http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > >> >> >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/ > > > >> >> >> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > >> >> >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > >> >> >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ > >> >> >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > >> >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
