On 8/19/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Wendy wrote:
> A non-SNAPSHOT version should be built exactly once if at all
> possible.  Once it's in a repository, for all intents and purposes it
> *is* released and should not be changed.  Next time around let's
> just evaluate the -SNAPSHOT version until it's ready to tag and
> release.

Isn't that why we have a test repository for snapshots?  Otherwise, you'd
only get one shot at publishing any particular version number, and we'd end
up with lots of holes in the sequence of version numbers ever actually
published.

You can't have it both ways. :)  Either we do test builds and discard
them if necessary, or we build release candidates as 1.1.3-RC1, -RC2,
etc.

But we should not be building and re-building (and deploying to a
public repository) anything that does not have a SNAPSHOT version
number.

We would never go back and 're-do' a release candidate, correct?

Taking the next bits out of order...

I would prefer to see our release votes be about "these are the
exact bits that I want to push to the dist directory, and to ibiblio".

Agreed.

The problem with evaluating the snapshots is we're trusting that nothing
goes wrong with the real build process after version numbers are updated in
the POMs.
...
We definitely don't want to be pushing test artifacts with non-SNAPSHOT
versions as a normal course of action, but in the roll-up to a release it
seems like the only way to do it.

We review and fix the snapshots until we're happy with them.  (For
MyFaces, I insert the last-changed svn revision number in the
distribution filename.)

Then we change the version number, build and deploy it once as 1.1.3,
and vote on that.

If there's a problem, move on to the next version.

Can you explain why you think "missing" version numbers will be a problem?

> I'll look at it tomorrow afternoon, but I suspect renaming the files
> will be the easiest solution for 1.0.3.

I can live with that for this version.

Sounds good. It's now tomorrow evening and I haven't had time yet. :(

Thanks,
--
Wendy

Reply via email to