Re: New non-Apache Sanselan release

[Craig L Russell]

Hi Charles,

Does it make sense to ship the binary release as a maven artifact?



Craig

On Jan 23, 2008, at 11:15 PM, Charles Matthew Chen wrote:

This would be useful (mostly) if users wrote code and wanted to automatically include it in their programs. It would be suitable if the primary release artifact is "just a jar with a bunch of java classes and legal notices (meta-inf) in it".

Hi Craig,

  It seems like our needs are fairly ordinary.  Like most projects, I
think we would do well to produce "source" and "binary" releases.

  The binary release would include a .jar file with the core classes
(no unit tests or test data), the javadocs and basic files such as the
license, changelist, a snapshot of the wiki docs (or at least a
reference to them), etc.  The .jar file wouldn't neccessarily have to
be signed, or packaged in a particular way.

  The source release would include all of the sources files (core and
test), the test data, the javadocs, and the basic files.  It would
include nearly everything in the repo.  I'm not sure what it wouldn't
include.

   The binary and source releases would be available as both .zip and
.tar.gz archives.

Charles.

On Jan 23, 2008 1:04 AM, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi Charles,


On Jan 22, 2008, at 9:12 PM, Charles Matthew Chen wrote:

Hi all,

 I've released a new non-Apache build (0.88) of Sanselan.  It's
available here:

http://fightingquaker.com/sanselan/

...

 On the last point, I wonder what we can do to reach the point of
our first apache build.  I saw the following message on the

idea to enlist Robert's help?

incubator's general mailing list a few weeks ago. Would it be a good

Before we get there, we need to make sure we're ready to release
something.

Let's start with this: What do we release? How do we package it?

Craig

What Robert is discussing here is where to post the release artifacts.

Charles.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Robert Burrell Donkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 22:51:23 +0000
Subject: Re: Uploading Releases to apache.org/dist/incubator

On Jan 2, 2008 10:26 PM, Frank Barnaby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi folks,

hi frank

I've found some information regarding the need to distribute
incubating
releases through www.apache.org/dist/incubator/podling-name
(ie, people.apache.org:/www/www.apache.org/dist/incubator/podling-name)

that
I should consult this mailing list before populating the dist area.

and have read a readme in the dist/incubator directory, which states

yep - i created that document

policy is now that official releases issued by the incubator need to
be distributed through the standard apache distribution mechanism


walk anyone who wants to release though the process

if i'm right in assuming that this is river-related, let's hop back
onto river-dev (i'm subscribing now). if not, please jump in

- robert

the documentation is still being worked on ATM so i've volunteered to

Craig Russell

Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/ jdo

408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature