On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/doc/dev.html > > I would like to get some feedback on this doc, to see if it makes > sense or not (from an Apache but also build and release point of > view).
* be more specific about the version of JUnit (3.x or 4.x) in the building section - unless it doesn't matter, of course. * creating a branch is optional, it depends on the project's preferences, I guess. We haven't created a branch for 1.7.x, yet, for example. Maintaining two branches can be painful, so it may be a good idea to defer branching until you make changes to your trunk that you don't want to see in your next 2.0.x release. * I'd add [email protected] to the "Announce" section. > One thing I still don't know how to address is the case of a vote > rejecting the release. In this case, we'll need to update something > and submit again the release. So, is tagging before the vote a good > idea, or should we tag only when the vote is accepted (note that the > release is already build from a branch, so it's already safely > reproducible)? When I released AntUnit and the .NET Antlibs I created the tags in my filesystem (simple svn cp on directories instead of URLs) and committed them after the vote had passed. This is mostly a matter of taste since in svn a tag is not really frozen. I.e. if the vote fails you can simply either modify the tag or delete and recreate it. > Another thing with which I'm not familiar is signing. Do signing > files alter them? No. You'd create a detached signature which just like the checksum files is stand-alone. Stefan
