Please take a look at Apache Spark or Apache Blur. I have created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-6792 for getting ASF Nexus access for Apache metamodel.
I will also need to create INFRA ticket to set svnpubsub for publishing release artifacts. Ankit, lets create new thread to discuss details steps about MetaModel release. The POM also needs to be updated to have incubating in the version like: 4.0.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT - Henry On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Ankit Kumar <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi All, > > Did setup the GPG key for myself and also managed to understand a bit more > of the release profile as defined in the apache parent pom project. Also > compared our poms with the GORA project pom. > > We have one issue before we can hit the maven release and that is, our > project is using GIT as the SCM and we need to know how apache projects > using GIT as SCM configure the release plugin. > > We have configured in the SCM tag only the URL for the git repo and somehow > in the mvn release:prepare DryRun I could see it was expecting something > related to SVN so the dryRun failed. > <scm> > <url> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-metamodel.git</url> > </scm> > > Could you guys share an example Apache project which uses GIT as SCM, we > could then look at that as example for configuring the release plugin. > > Also how can we get the Jenkin's job to be created for our project. > > Regards > Ankit > > > > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Henry Saputra <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Yeah the RE (Release Engineer) needs to generate GPG key that will be >> used to sign the release artifacts. >> There is a link in the Apache release guide on how to do that. >> >> Will try my best to free up some time to write steps to release >> artifacts around end of this week. >> Apologize for delay >> >> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Kasper Sørensen >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Just read through the GORA HOW_TO and I think it speaks a language that >> > we're used to, so that's a good starting point for doing the release. >> > >> > Noticed a few things we have to get straightened out: >> > >> > - Check if our pom.xml file(s) are similar to that of GORA wrt. release >> > plugin etc. >> > - JIRA. We need to register the release and the issues solved there. >> > - Changes.txt. We have to make such a file and start maintaining it. >> > - Notice.txt file. We need to accumulate the various license >> attributions >> > etc. from all of our dependencies here. >> > - Artifact signing. Didn't dive into this yet, but I see we probably >> need >> > to manage a KEYS file and set up release engineer accounts with GPG. >> > >> > >> > 2013/9/12 Henry Saputra <[email protected]> >> > >> >> Agree, you can start with [1] and [2] and give it a shot =) >> >> >> >> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/release-java.html >> >> [2] >> >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GORA/Apache+Gora+Release+Procedure+HOW_TO >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Matt Franklin < >> [email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Also, take a look at other project's documented release guides. They >> >> are a >> >> > good starting point. Any specific questions, the mentors should be >> able >> >> to >> >> > help you answer >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Henry Saputra < >> [email protected] >> >> >wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> HI Ankit, >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes I agree, it takes a bit of research to do first release. >> >> >> >> >> >> I will create a wiki page with direct TODO steps for us new with ASF >> >> >> to be release manager. >> >> >> >> >> >> It will be sometimes this week and will send email to @dev list when >> >> >> it is ready. >> >> >> >> >> >> - Henry >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Ankit Kumar < >> [email protected]> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > Hi Henry, >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Thanks for sharing more info on the release process. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > My local git repository clone is building successfully with all >> tests >> >> >> > passing but I do not understand how/where to start. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The process appears to be still quite a ceremony with lot of steps >> >> pretty >> >> >> > new to us. In order to bring more structure and clarity, could we >> >> please >> >> >> > make a TODO list with a bit of explanation on what is expected from >> >> that >> >> >> > TODO item. This will also help us divide work amongst the group (if >> >> >> needed) >> >> >> > and also as part of working on each TODO item we can also >> >> learn/document >> >> >> > the whole process nicely. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I guess the TODO list should help a lot already but if needed can >> we >> >> also >> >> >> > have a skype call(with anyone who knows the process) to >> >> >> discuss/understand >> >> >> > in detail. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Regards >> >> >> > Ankit >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Henry Saputra < >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> >wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Marvin sent out good tips on how to get IPMC votes for releases >> under >> >> >> >> ASF incubator. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> - Henry >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> >> >> >> From: Marvin Humphrey <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> Date: Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 9:22 AM >> >> >> >> Subject: [DISCUSS] Release of Apache Allura (incubating) v1.0.0 >> >> >> >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Rich Bowen <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > Hmm. Did we do something wrong with our call for vote? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Perhaps not this one, though the voting on allura-dev@incubatorwas >> >> >> >> somewhat >> >> >> >> irregular. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> * No "[VOTE]" in the subject. >> >> >> >> * Spread out over multiple threads. >> >> >> >> * No time specification. (I recommend the phrase "at least 72 >> >> >> hours".) >> >> >> >> * PPMC votes claimed as "binding", which is ambiguous. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> So long as the IPMC VOTE clears, though, those irregularities >> don't >> >> >> block >> >> >> >> the >> >> >> >> release IMO. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I'd also like to note that the dev list archives for Allura are >> >> >> >> time-consuming >> >> >> >> and tedious to plow through -- the signal-to-noise ratio is poor >> due >> >> to >> >> >> the >> >> >> >> large number of auto-generated messages with trivial content. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Can anyone suggest any reason why we've gotten ZERO response to >> >> this >> >> >> >> message >> >> >> >> > or to Dave's followup? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Allura has four Mentors. You've voted, but where are the others? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Mentors must lead the way, particularly for the first release. >> >> >> "Freelance" >> >> >> >> reviews of release artifacts, by IPMC members who are not >> following >> >> the >> >> >> >> podling's development, are by their nature superficial. For >> >> instance, a >> >> >> >> freelancer can run RAT and see whether there are files with >> missing >> >> ALv2 >> >> >> >> headers, but can't see whether files with ALv2 headers had them >> >> >> installed >> >> >> >> appropriately. We count on Mentors to endorse the podling's >> initial >> >> IP >> >> >> >> handling, from supervising the code grant to monitoring the dev >> list >> >> and >> >> >> >> commits list day-by-day and ensuring that everything is proper. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> After the first release, we are voting on a delta, and all new >> >> changes >> >> >> have >> >> >> >> happened within Apache channels which are comparatively more >> >> auditable. >> >> >> >> However, for the initial incubating release, we are voting on >> >> >> development >> >> >> >> which took place elsewhere, and Mentors have better insight than >> the >> >> >> rest >> >> >> >> of >> >> >> >> the IPMC into the importation and assimilation of that dark matter >> >> into >> >> >> >> Apache. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Can some of the old hands around here give us some insight into >> >> what >> >> >> we >> >> >> >> need >> >> >> >> > to do to get things moving? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Getting enough IPMC votes for incubating releases is an age-old >> issue >> >> >> for >> >> >> >> the >> >> >> >> Incubator. Many long-term remedies have been discussed, but none >> of >> >> >> that >> >> >> >> will >> >> >> >> help the acute problem faced by Allura. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> In today's Incubator, the most effective strategy for an >> individual >> >> >> >> podling to >> >> >> >> take is for its core contributors to become serious experts about >> >> >> Apache IP >> >> >> >> and release policy and to present squeaky clean release candidates >> >> which >> >> >> >> make >> >> >> >> a best effort to follow all known rules and guidelines. In >> Allura's >> >> >> case, >> >> >> >> not >> >> >> >> only would it help to run the dev list VOTEs more cleanly, but it >> >> would >> >> >> >> help >> >> >> >> if PPMC members who vote +1 document exactly what steps they took >> to >> >> >> >> validate >> >> >> >> the release candidate. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> It's nice to see a list like this accompanying a +1 vote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> * Sums and sigs OK (log below). >> >> >> >> * Build from source tarball succeeds and passes tests on >> [list >> >> >> >> platforms]. >> >> >> >> * Extended tests pass on [list platforms]. >> >> >> >> * RAT build target passes. >> >> >> >> * Tarball name contains "incubating". >> >> >> >> * Incubation DISCLAIMER included. >> >> >> >> * Expanded tarball matches version control tag exactly (diff >> >> log >> >> >> >> below). >> >> >> >> * LICENSE and NOTICE assembled according to >> >> >> >> <http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html> per >> >> >> discussion at >> >> >> >> [link]. >> >> >> >> * LICENSE and NOTICE up-to-date, as no dependencies have >> been >> >> >> added >> >> >> >> since initial assembly. >> >> >> >> * All copyleft dependencies purged as documented at [issue]. >> >> >> >> * Copyright date in NOTICE is current. >> >> >> >> * CHANGES entry is current. >> >> >> >> * Issue tracker clean (no open issues for this release). >> >> >> >> ... >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Documented diligence by podling contributors lowers the cost of >> >> >> reviewing >> >> >> >> and >> >> >> >> voting for Mentors and other IPMC members, and may help to >> persuade >> >> >> those >> >> >> >> hanging back to participate. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Marvin Humphrey >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
