On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 13:46 -0500, Leonardo Uribe wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:56 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Leonardo Uribe schrieb: > > Hi > > I think that myfaces-builder-plugin has been very well > tested so we can release a first version of this tool. > > Is there any task left? > I think there is still a fair bit of work that could be done > on the plugin. However I don't see any reason why we can't > make a release now. > > Hmm..by the way, I just noticed that the pom does not specify > a <version> tag. So it is inheriting that from its parent, and > therefore existing snapshots are all 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT which is > rather odd for a project that has never been released. What > version number will be used for the first release? > > Since there was only one release of myfaces build tools, maybe we can > release individually myfaces-builder-plugin and > myfaces-builder-annotations, so the release number could be 1.0.0. But > I feel better is we release all plugins buildtools plugin (1.0.1). A > version number is just a number, no?.
I don't think it makes any sense to release the whole set of myfaces plugins. Code shouldn't be released that hasn't been tested, and there is no way that we can retest every one of those plugins now. I'm *guessing* that the original argument for releasing all these at once is that they were all needed for a trinidad release, and that if the trinidad release built and ran ok, then that was sufficient testing to prove that the plugins were ok. That's a reasonable arguments for plugins that have only one purpose (build trinidad), and are never expected to be used in any other situation. But that's certainly not the case for the myfaces-builder-plugin. It is: (a) used by a number of different myfaces projects, and (b) theoretically useable by non-myfaces projects So IMO it needs its own release cycle. And I would suggest that the other plugins be managed the same way to; in the next version of trinidad, a few of these plugins might need modifications but not all, and it would be just crazy to re-release plugins that have not changed at all. This is consistent with what we do elsewhere. Myfaces Core api+impl are released together because it makes no sense to do anything else. But Orchestra core and core15 are released independently, as they are NOT tightly coupled. Just for reference, the plugins that currently have 1.0.0 releases are: myfaces-faces-plugin myfaces-i18n-plugin myfaces-javacc-plugin myfaces-javascript-plugin myfaces-jdev-plugin myfaces-tagdoc-plugin myfaces-wagon-plugin myfaces-xrts-plugin and were all released simultaneously on 2008-04-20. I would suggest we do this: * do a 1.0.1 release of the parent pom * add an explicit <version> to the pom of every plugin (initially set to 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT) (and also set parent pom version to 1.0.1). * create a RELEASE-NOTES.txt file for myfaces-builder-plugin explaining why the first release is numbered 1.0.1 * do a first release of myfaces-builder-plugin as version 1.0.1 Any other plugins that need to be modified and released should then be released individually as needed. (NB: we should use 1.0.1 as the first release number for myfaces-builder-plugin because we have already been creating 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT versions in the apache snapshot repo, as the version number was being inherited from the parent pom). > > > The parent pom does need to be released first, and that > currently depends on the new myfaces-master-pom which depends > on the new checkstyle module. The release process for the > master pom and checkstyle is currently in progress; there are > now enough +1s so I will finish the release of these tonight. > That's a little short of the recommended 72 hours since the RC > announcement (only 48 hours), but these modules are really > only internal so I hope no-one will be annoyed by that. Regards, Simon >
