So, I created the packages using the binary release available on the official site, but using the XML doc I got for building it on my machine.
Please test them and let me know if you find any problem: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5037284/Lucene.net-nuget/Lucene.2.9.4.1.zip To test them unzip to file somewhere in your disk, and specify the folder as path for Nuget in the package management settings window. If all is good I'll push them online tomorrow I noticed not all contrib projects have been released as binary, so I'm including in the contrib pkg only the ones that are part of the binary release on the apache site. I didn't create the sample package with the demo apps because it's just the compiled apps, and not of a create use for those who want to study it. I'll look into making a proper demo pkg in the next weeks. I've seen ICSharpCode.SharpZipLib is always included in the bin folder after compiling, but if I'm not wrong it's only needed if compressed indexes are needed: shall I add it as dependency or not? Finally I needed a logo for the package: I used that one https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lucene.net/trunk/branding/logo/lucene-net-icon-128x128.png But if would be great if it was also somewhere in the public site. For this version I think it's ok to leave it there, but maybe for a next release it would be good to publish it in the website. I did a few changes: do I create a diff file and send it to someone? Simone On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 11:04 PM, Simone Chiaretta < simone.chiare...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > maybe I'm missing something, but looks like the snk file for strongly > signing is in the public repo on svn.apache.org > > Simone > > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Simone Chiaretta < > simone.chiare...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Good... no need to have another key... >> Simo >> >> --- >> Simone Chiaretta >> @simonech >> Sent from a tablet >> >> On 01/dic/2011, at 21:04, Michael Herndon <mhern...@wickedsoftware.net> >> wrote: >> >> > Keep in mind tho that having the token checked in somewhere in the >> source >> > repository is not a good idea b/c someone could use it and publish >> malware >> > or trojans under your identity. So unless the token is stored outside >> the >> > source repository, it's not a good idea to have it in the CI. >> > >> > - stored in an ASF private repo. >> > >> > the a new key probably needs to be generated and stored in the private >> ASF >> > repo as well. >> > >> > >> > The CI build is at builds.apache.org, however its not complete. >> > >> > On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Simone Chiaretta < >> simone.chiare...@gmail.com >> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Mine below >> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Michael Herndon < >> >> mhern...@wickedsoftware.net >> >>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Simone Chiaretta < >> >>> simone.chiare...@gmail.com >> >>>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> You mean a different impersonal Nuget account? >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> yes. the goal of the impersonal account was to allow committers to >> push >> >>> nuget packages in an automated way without the need of having their >> own >> >>> account. there was some preliminary work of building nuget packages >> using >> >>> the build scripts. >> >>> >> >> >> >> Sorry, I haven't followed a lot lately: at the end, did we end up using >> >> teamcity on codebetter or another build system? I remember there were >> >> discussion on that but don't remember how they ended. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> there has been talk on various nuget channels about allowing nuget to >> >> have >> >>> --pre tag or having a separate build channel. If you're not familiar >> with >> >>> gems/bundler, its basically a way to push packages that are not >> official >> >>> releases. (nightly, ctp, beta, etc). So in theory the CI could build >> >>> packages nightly if the build does not fail into a channels. >> >>> >> >>> its also helps from an overall branding perspective. >> >>> >> >> >> >> The author that appears on the nuget gallery page can be different >> from the >> >> owner that puts the package online. >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>> From what I've seen also used in MS pkgs devs have their in accounts >> >> but >> >>>> pkgs have multiple owners. >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> If its possible to do so link your account as an owner & prescott's >> >> account >> >>> with the impersonal one. >> >>> >> >> >> >> Keep in mind tho that having the token checked in somewhere in the >> source >> >> repository is not a good idea b/c someone could use it and publish >> malware >> >> or trojans under your identity. So unless the token is stored outside >> the >> >> source repository, it's not a good idea to have it in the CI. >> >> >> >> One last thing: I notice that the official lib is strongly named... >> again, >> >> not a good idea to have the key checked in the source control. I guess >> now >> >> someone owns the key for the strong naming and does the signing offline >> >> from the CI. Is that correct? >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>> But if you want we can also go with the Lucene.net team account. >> >>>> Simo >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Simone Chiaretta >> >> Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider >> >> Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz >> >> RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber >> >> twitter: @simonech >> >> >> >> Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic >> >> "Life is short, play hard" >> >> >> > > > > -- > Simone Chiaretta > Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider > Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz > RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber > twitter: @simonech > > Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic > "Life is short, play hard" > -- Simone Chiaretta Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber twitter: @simonech Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic "Life is short, play hard"
