Thank you!
On 4/23/22, 4:18 AM, "Zowalla, Richard" <richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de>
wrote:
Hi Rod,
I updated the release tools (with TOMEE-3921), so we are now creating
consistent hashes regardless of the tooling used (homebrew release
tools vs linux onboard), i.e. it will be "<sha512> filename".
Gruß
Richard
Am Freitag, dem 22.04.2022 um 21:41 +0000 schrieb Jenkins, Rodney J
(Rod):
> <<
> Do you have a preference for automation in your environment and
> for
> docker?
>
> My only preference is consistency. I have no technical preference
> one way or the other. I can script it either way. I do not want to
> alter Dockerfiles each time we do a release.
>
> Thanks,
> Rod.
>
>
> On 4/22/22, 11:32 AM, "Richard Zowalla" <r...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an EXTERNAL
> email. Use CAUTION before clicking on links, opening attachments, or
> responding. (Sender:
> dev-return-29302-JENKIR14=nationwide....@tomee.apache.org)
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
>
>
> Hi Rod
>
> > My counterparts have reported that the sha files are in
> different
> > format than the last version, but the same as 8.0.7.
>
> >It would be nice if we could have a permanent standard. When
> we
> >change the formats, it breaks automation on our end and in the
> docker
> >images.
>
> I agree - this time, the SHA512 hashes are created using our
> https://github.com/apache/tomee-release-tools
>
> I quickly checked the other releases (1.7.x, 7.x, 7.1.x), which
> follow
> the same pattern.
>
> BUT I agree, that it was different in previous TomEE 8 releases -
> perhaps the SHA512 hashes were not created using the tomee-
> release-
> tools. Nevertheless, we can enhance the release tools to follow
> the
> unix like pattern:
>
> <sha512> filename
>
> instead of
>
> <sha512>
>
> I have no preference ;) - for the first option, we need to update
> the
> release tools to include the filename to the .sha512 files. That
> would
> beconsistent in case the release hashs aren't created via the
> tomee-
> release-tools.
>
> Do you have a preference for automation in your environment and
> for
> docker?
>
> Gruß
> Rchard
>
>
>
>
> Am Freitag, dem 22.04.2022 um 15:26 +0000 schrieb Jenkins, Rodney
> J
> (Rod):
> > Richard,
> >
> > Thank you for the release and congrats on your 1st release.
> >
> > My counterparts have reported that the sha files are in
> different
> > format than the last version, but the same as 8.0.7.
> >
> > It would be nice if we could have a permanent standard. When
> we
> > change the formats, it breaks automation on our end and in the
> docker
> > images.
> >
> > I've not had the time to verify this for myself, I will get to
> that
> > in the next couple of days.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Rod.
> > ________________________________
> > From: Zowalla, Richard <richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de>
> > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2022 1:37 AM
> > To: dev@tomee.apache.org <dev@tomee.apache.org>
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Follow-up to 8.0.11: Update of release
> > documentation
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > after conducting my first release, I put my notes together and
> > updated
> > our release documentation:
> > https://tomee.apache.org/dev/release-tomee.html
> >
> > It might not be complete and might require some further
> polishing but
> > I
> > think, that this will help others in conducting a release. The
> > initial
> > ASF-related setup + GPG keys requires some effort ;)
> >
> > In general, we learned that teaming up (committer + pmc) for a
> > release
> > works quite well and it was a pleassure to work with JL on
> 8.0.11 :)
> >
> > Most of the mechanical steps can be conducted with committer
> access
> > privileges (building, tagging, nexus/maven deploy, staging
> artifacts
> > to
> > dist/dev); some formal steps like open/close the VOTE, moving
> the
> > artifacts from dist/dev to dist/release require a PMC member to
> be
> > involved.
> >
> > Gruß
> > Richard
>
>
