Hi Konrad,

After further investigation, I'm leaning toward the
org-apache-sling-testing-sling-mock-oak build troubles being a problem with
an old version of the maven-shade-plugin and not a problem specifically
with the changes in the new parent pom.

The org-apache-sling-testing-sling-mock-oak/pom.xml doesn't specify a
version for the maven-shade-plugin plugin and my build seemed to be
choosing version 3.1.1 of that plugin.  The problem goes away if I change
the pom to specify version 3.2.2 or later of the maven-shade-plugin.

Regards,
-Eric

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 4:43 PM Eric Norman <enor...@apache.org> wrote:

> tentative -1 for me.  I didn't have time to determine the root reason, but
> I tried switching org-apache-sling-testing-sling-mock-oak to this parent
> version and the build got stuck.  The same doesn't happen with parent 41.
>
> From what I can tell, the org-apache-sling-testing-sling-mock-oak build
> appears to go into an infinite loop while generating the
> dependency-reduced-pom.xml file.  Removing org.osgi.util.tracker from the
> dependencies of the parent pom seems to make the problem go away, so I'm
> assuming there is some conflict around that change somewhere.
>
>
> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:26 AM Konrad Windszus <konra...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We solved 5 issues in this release:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SLING/versions/12349946
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SLING/versions/12349945
>>
>> Staging repository:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachesling-2450/
>>
>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the
>> signatures:
>>
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=sling-tooling-release.git;a=blob;f=check_staged_release.sh;hb=HEAD
>>
>> Usage:
>> sh check_staged_release.sh [YOUR REPOSITORY ID] /tmp/sling-staging
>>
>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>
>>   [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>   [ ]  0 Don't care
>>   [ ] -1 Don't release, because ...
>>
>> This majority vote is open for at least 72 hours.
>> Konrad
>
>

Reply via email to