Hi Andy Andy Seaborne wrote: > On 20/11/11 14:46, Paolo Castagna wrote: >> I was just saying that a good practice it to use src/test/resources >> and load data files necessary for tests via classpath so that it's >> possible and trivial to ship a self contained and working test suite >> as a single jar. Apply this to what we have has a big cost for little >> or close to zero value. So, I aggree on no action on this. > > This is the web! > > Loading from the classpath does not work - some tests need a base URI > and some test load files using relative URIs. > >>> 0/ Make a top level module of Jena2 >> JenaDist should have JenaTop as parent pom, but other than this I do not >> see what else we would need. > > We need to have a proper SVN area for it. We can't go with something > tucked under /Scratch/PC/
Sure. I put it there since is was just an experiment to communicate the idea. I am also not sure about the name: JenaDist? JenaAll? Others? > Can you do that? Sure. I would call it JenaDist (and jena-dist the Maven name) and put it here: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/jena/Jena2/JenaDist Ok? >>> 4/ Needs the change logs from Jena and ARQ at least. >>> I don't how to mechanism this - copy into JenaDist for now. >> Ok. >> >> JIRA has a "Change Log" tab which could help automating this (I often >> forget to update the CHANGELOG.txt files and I agree that is important). > > Can we just concentrate on getting release done and not adding work to > the timeline? We have the ChangeLogs already (and the JIRA log is > somewhat minimal). Ack. > We are not trying to detail every change (too much) - we're trying to > tell people what they need to know, which isn't a detail dump of > everything. > >> A final comment. We will probably not get everything right with the first >> release, that's fine so long we are ready to quickly fix (via a bug fix >> release) problems as we discover them. I think "release early and often" >> applies here as we learn the release process in Apache and we try to fit >> what we used to do in a different context (with different constraints). > > I don't see it like that; it's not about the code, it's the process. > > We are trying to get through Apache process, including checking on > incubator-general@ It's useful to read other incubator projects getting > through that. > > We will only get some much bandwidth from people there; it's a busy place. > > While we can do dev builds, there isn't "quick" for releases. My idea > of "quick" is a few hours; loop time here is going to one week+ for a > two sequential votes. Getting it right is quite a good idea. Ok. Paolo > > Andy
