Re: [meecrowave] getting rid of snapshots
OWB is a non-issue :) Hope that CXF will release soon too. LieGrue, strub > On Sunday, 13 November 2016, 21:23, Romain Manni-Bucau > wrote: > > Hi guys, > > ATM we depend on 2 snapshots: > > - OWB > - CXF > > I'm pretty sure we can solve the first one pretty easily and CXF should > release next month. I'd like to get a release out a bit before Xmas if we > can. To make that possible I'll get in touch with CXF to ensure they > don't > release too late for us but we also need to do our own homeworks and that's > where I'd like your feedback before going outside our own community: > > 1. release OWB > 2. check all the legal stuff (to avoid some round trips and N votes) - I > did a first pass but help if more than welcomed on that topic > 3. upgrade CXF and OWB and ensure we still work > 4. optional but good - get some reviews of current code > > Side note: we can also speak about owning the CXF CDI extension and not > reuse CXF one which would avoid us to depend on CXF snapshot (last release > got some bugs only in this part which is 2-3 classes). That said I like > reusing as much as possible of CXF and own as few as possible of the stack. > > Wdyt? Does it sounds feasible? > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory > <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> >
[meecrowave] getting rid of snapshots
Hi guys, ATM we depend on 2 snapshots: - OWB - CXF I'm pretty sure we can solve the first one pretty easily and CXF should release next month. I'd like to get a release out a bit before Xmas if we can. To make that possible I'll get in touch with CXF to ensure they don't release too late for us but we also need to do our own homeworks and that's where I'd like your feedback before going outside our own community: 1. release OWB 2. check all the legal stuff (to avoid some round trips and N votes) - I did a first pass but help if more than welcomed on that topic 3. upgrade CXF and OWB and ensure we still work 4. optional but good - get some reviews of current code Side note: we can also speak about owning the CXF CDI extension and not reuse CXF one which would avoid us to depend on CXF snapshot (last release got some bugs only in this part which is 2-3 classes). That said I like reusing as much as possible of CXF and own as few as possible of the stack. Wdyt? Does it sounds feasible? Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
Re: Snapshots
Last night I updated the Hudson configuration for OpenWebBeans-trunk and set the "Goals and options" field to "clean deploy". Hopefully that will do the trick! Sincerely, Joe On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 7:51 PM, David Jencks wrote: > Unless something has changed in the (rather long) time since I looked at > this, you don't want to use that option because it doesn't use mvn deploy > and doesn't end up with the right metadata. Can you adjust hudson to run > mvn clean deploy instead of mvn clean install? This can result in only the > first few modules of a broken build getting deployed, but I'm OK with that > happening occasionally. > > thanks > david jencks > > On Jun 22, 2011, at 4:26 PM, Joseph Bergmark wrote: > > > I set up the Hudson builds for both OpenWebBeans-trunk > > and OpenWebBeans_1.0.x. I suspect I could configure it to also configure > it > > to publish them. I see there is a "Deploy artifacts to Maven repository" > > option that takes a repository URL. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Joe > > > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 6:02 PM, David Blevins >wrote: > > > >> > >> On Mar 10, 2011, at 1:43 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > >> > >>> Not sure if we like to do that. Of course it would be easier to handle, > >> but this might break geronimo snapshot releases which assume that a > current > >> SPI doesn't got changed. > >>> > >>> I think we can leave it as is with our manual deploys. This way, we > have > >> the opportunity to tell the geronimo guys that something will change > before > >> we break their build ;) > >>> > >>> @geronimo folks, what is your opinion? > >> > >> Now that we have CI systems setup for both Geronimo and OpenEJB we're > >> getting a fair amount of build failures due to out of date OWB snaps. > >> > >> Who has access to setup the OWB snapshots to automatically publish? > >> > >> > >> -David > >> > >>> --- On Thu, 3/10/11, David Blevins wrote: > >>> > >>>> From: David Blevins > >>>> Subject: Snapshots > >>>> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > >>>> Date: Thursday, March 10, 2011, 1:06 AM > >>>> Does our hudson setup deploy > >>>> snapshots? If not I could set that up in > >>>> buildbot. It's possible in buildbot to have it only > >>>> deploy after a successful 'mvn clean install' > >>>> > >>>> -David > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >
Re: Snapshots
txs, but it seems that 1.0.x is pretty much dead ;) It was just a branch to theoretically have something where we can apply quick fixes in case the 1.1.0 release turns out to be broken in productive projects. Au contraire - 1.1.0 worked out much better and faster for all projects I know, so 1.0.x is imo not needed anymore. LieGrue, strub --- On Wed, 6/22/11, Joseph Bergmark wrote: > From: Joseph Bergmark > Subject: Re: Snapshots > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > Cc: d...@geronimo.apache.org > Date: Wednesday, June 22, 2011, 11:26 PM > I set up the Hudson builds for both > OpenWebBeans-trunk > and OpenWebBeans_1.0.x. I suspect I could configure > it to also configure it > to publish them. I see there is a "Deploy artifacts > to Maven repository" > option that takes a repository URL. > > Sincerely, > > Joe > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 6:02 PM, David Blevins wrote: > > > > > On Mar 10, 2011, at 1:43 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > > > > > Not sure if we like to do that. Of course it > would be easier to handle, > > but this might break geronimo snapshot releases which > assume that a current > > SPI doesn't got changed. > > > > > > I think we can leave it as is with our manual > deploys. This way, we have > > the opportunity to tell the geronimo guys that > something will change before > > we break their build ;) > > > > > > @geronimo folks, what is your opinion? > > > > Now that we have CI systems setup for both Geronimo > and OpenEJB we're > > getting a fair amount of build failures due to out of > date OWB snaps. > > > > Who has access to setup the OWB snapshots to > automatically publish? > > > > > > -David > > > > > --- On Thu, 3/10/11, David Blevins > wrote: > > > > > >> From: David Blevins > > >> Subject: Snapshots > > >> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > > >> Date: Thursday, March 10, 2011, 1:06 AM > > >> Does our hudson setup deploy > > >> snapshots? If not I could set that up > in > > >> buildbot. It's possible in buildbot to > have it only > > >> deploy after a successful 'mvn clean > install' > > >> > > >> -David > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Snapshots
Unless something has changed in the (rather long) time since I looked at this, you don't want to use that option because it doesn't use mvn deploy and doesn't end up with the right metadata. Can you adjust hudson to run mvn clean deploy instead of mvn clean install? This can result in only the first few modules of a broken build getting deployed, but I'm OK with that happening occasionally. thanks david jencks On Jun 22, 2011, at 4:26 PM, Joseph Bergmark wrote: > I set up the Hudson builds for both OpenWebBeans-trunk > and OpenWebBeans_1.0.x. I suspect I could configure it to also configure it > to publish them. I see there is a "Deploy artifacts to Maven repository" > option that takes a repository URL. > > Sincerely, > > Joe > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 6:02 PM, David Blevins wrote: > >> >> On Mar 10, 2011, at 1:43 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: >> >>> Not sure if we like to do that. Of course it would be easier to handle, >> but this might break geronimo snapshot releases which assume that a current >> SPI doesn't got changed. >>> >>> I think we can leave it as is with our manual deploys. This way, we have >> the opportunity to tell the geronimo guys that something will change before >> we break their build ;) >>> >>> @geronimo folks, what is your opinion? >> >> Now that we have CI systems setup for both Geronimo and OpenEJB we're >> getting a fair amount of build failures due to out of date OWB snaps. >> >> Who has access to setup the OWB snapshots to automatically publish? >> >> >> -David >> >>> --- On Thu, 3/10/11, David Blevins wrote: >>> >>>> From: David Blevins >>>> Subject: Snapshots >>>> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org >>>> Date: Thursday, March 10, 2011, 1:06 AM >>>> Does our hudson setup deploy >>>> snapshots? If not I could set that up in >>>> buildbot. It's possible in buildbot to have it only >>>> deploy after a successful 'mvn clean install' >>>> >>>> -David >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>
Re: Snapshots
On Jun 22, 2011, at 4:26 PM, Joseph Bergmark wrote: > I set up the Hudson builds for both OpenWebBeans-trunk > and OpenWebBeans_1.0.x. I suspect I could configure it to also configure it > to publish them. I see there is a "Deploy artifacts to Maven repository" > option that takes a repository URL. That sounds promising. That or 'mvn clean install deploy' as the build command. I haven't spent even two seconds looking at Hudson config so not sure how to advise. The snapshot repo is here: http://repository.apache.org/snapshots -David > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 6:02 PM, David Blevins wrote: > >> >> On Mar 10, 2011, at 1:43 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: >> >>> Not sure if we like to do that. Of course it would be easier to handle, >> but this might break geronimo snapshot releases which assume that a current >> SPI doesn't got changed. >>> >>> I think we can leave it as is with our manual deploys. This way, we have >> the opportunity to tell the geronimo guys that something will change before >> we break their build ;) >>> >>> @geronimo folks, what is your opinion? >> >> Now that we have CI systems setup for both Geronimo and OpenEJB we're >> getting a fair amount of build failures due to out of date OWB snaps. >> >> Who has access to setup the OWB snapshots to automatically publish? >> >> >> -David >> >>> --- On Thu, 3/10/11, David Blevins wrote: >>> >>>> From: David Blevins >>>> Subject: Snapshots >>>> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org >>>> Date: Thursday, March 10, 2011, 1:06 AM >>>> Does our hudson setup deploy >>>> snapshots? If not I could set that up in >>>> buildbot. It's possible in buildbot to have it only >>>> deploy after a successful 'mvn clean install' >>>> >>>> -David >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>
Re: Snapshots
I set up the Hudson builds for both OpenWebBeans-trunk and OpenWebBeans_1.0.x. I suspect I could configure it to also configure it to publish them. I see there is a "Deploy artifacts to Maven repository" option that takes a repository URL. Sincerely, Joe On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 6:02 PM, David Blevins wrote: > > On Mar 10, 2011, at 1:43 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > > > Not sure if we like to do that. Of course it would be easier to handle, > but this might break geronimo snapshot releases which assume that a current > SPI doesn't got changed. > > > > I think we can leave it as is with our manual deploys. This way, we have > the opportunity to tell the geronimo guys that something will change before > we break their build ;) > > > > @geronimo folks, what is your opinion? > > Now that we have CI systems setup for both Geronimo and OpenEJB we're > getting a fair amount of build failures due to out of date OWB snaps. > > Who has access to setup the OWB snapshots to automatically publish? > > > -David > > > --- On Thu, 3/10/11, David Blevins wrote: > > > >> From: David Blevins > >> Subject: Snapshots > >> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > >> Date: Thursday, March 10, 2011, 1:06 AM > >> Does our hudson setup deploy > >> snapshots? If not I could set that up in > >> buildbot. It's possible in buildbot to have it only > >> deploy after a successful 'mvn clean install' > >> > >> -David > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
Re: Snapshots
On Mar 10, 2011, at 1:43 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > Not sure if we like to do that. Of course it would be easier to handle, but > this might break geronimo snapshot releases which assume that a current SPI > doesn't got changed. > > I think we can leave it as is with our manual deploys. This way, we have the > opportunity to tell the geronimo guys that something will change before we > break their build ;) > > @geronimo folks, what is your opinion? Now that we have CI systems setup for both Geronimo and OpenEJB we're getting a fair amount of build failures due to out of date OWB snaps. Who has access to setup the OWB snapshots to automatically publish? -David > --- On Thu, 3/10/11, David Blevins wrote: > >> From: David Blevins >> Subject: Snapshots >> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org >> Date: Thursday, March 10, 2011, 1:06 AM >> Does our hudson setup deploy >> snapshots? If not I could set that up in >> buildbot. It's possible in buildbot to have it only >> deploy after a successful 'mvn clean install' >> >> -David >> >> >> >> > > >
Re: Snapshots
David is one of the geronimo folks : ) If there's owb spi change, it will break geronimo sooner or later. We definitely want to know what's the change sooner. So, I prefer there's owb snapshot deployment automation. On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 5:43 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > Not sure if we like to do that. Of course it would be easier to handle, but > this might break geronimo snapshot releases which assume that a current SPI > doesn't got changed. > > I think we can leave it as is with our manual deploys. This way, we have > the opportunity to tell the geronimo guys that something will change before > we break their build ;) > > @geronimo folks, what is your opinion? > > LieGrue, > strub > > --- On Thu, 3/10/11, David Blevins wrote: > > > From: David Blevins > > Subject: Snapshots > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > > Date: Thursday, March 10, 2011, 1:06 AM > > Does our hudson setup deploy > > snapshots? If not I could set that up in > > buildbot. It's possible in buildbot to have it only > > deploy after a successful 'mvn clean install' > > > > -David > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Shawn
Re: Snapshots
Not sure if we like to do that. Of course it would be easier to handle, but this might break geronimo snapshot releases which assume that a current SPI doesn't got changed. I think we can leave it as is with our manual deploys. This way, we have the opportunity to tell the geronimo guys that something will change before we break their build ;) @geronimo folks, what is your opinion? LieGrue, strub --- On Thu, 3/10/11, David Blevins wrote: > From: David Blevins > Subject: Snapshots > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > Date: Thursday, March 10, 2011, 1:06 AM > Does our hudson setup deploy > snapshots? If not I could set that up in > buildbot. It's possible in buildbot to have it only > deploy after a successful 'mvn clean install' > > -David > > > >
Snapshots
Does our hudson setup deploy snapshots? If not I could set that up in buildbot. It's possible in buildbot to have it only deploy after a successful 'mvn clean install' -David
old snapshots moved
Hi! I moved our old snapshots from the old snapshot repo to my own peoples page http://people.apache.org/~struberg/old_snapshots/ This was done because this interferes with the _new_ official Apache snapshot repo location and causes problems with metadata calculation in maven. There should be no need for these files anymore because all released artifacts are on the official Apache download page anyway. So this is just in case we forgot some use case. LieGrue, strub
Re: old OWB snapshots on minotaur
Makes sense to me. Our previous releases are downloable, so its hard to see why folks would be interested in older snapshots when newer ones are available. Sincerely, Joe On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > nope they will not be downloadable anymore. But that's what a snapshot is > all about! There is a newer version already existing in the 'new' > apache.snapshots repository. > > LieGrue, > strub > > --- On Tue, 6/8/10, Joseph Bergmark wrote: > > > From: Joseph Bergmark > > Subject: Re: old OWB snapshots on minotaur > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > > Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2010, 2:54 PM > > I'm going to have to admit my lack of > > maven knowledge here a bit. What is > > the down side of dropping the old snapshot artifacts from > > the old repo? > > They would still be downloadable right, but you couldn't > > reference them from > > a recent pom.xml? > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Joe > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:43 AM, Mark Struberg > > wrote: > > > > > hi! > > > > > > we still have some old outdated OWB snapshots around > > on minotaur. They are > > > not in use anymore, but since we still use old plugins > > which register > > > 'apache.snapshots' for this old repository location, > > we get some mixup in > > > the maven-metadata which causes problems. > > > > > > One solution would be to completely drop all our old > > snapshot artifacts > > > from the old repo. wdyt? > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > strub > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: old OWB snapshots on minotaur
nope they will not be downloadable anymore. But that's what a snapshot is all about! There is a newer version already existing in the 'new' apache.snapshots repository. LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 6/8/10, Joseph Bergmark wrote: > From: Joseph Bergmark > Subject: Re: old OWB snapshots on minotaur > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2010, 2:54 PM > I'm going to have to admit my lack of > maven knowledge here a bit. What is > the down side of dropping the old snapshot artifacts from > the old repo? > They would still be downloadable right, but you couldn't > reference them from > a recent pom.xml? > > Sincerely, > > Joe > > > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:43 AM, Mark Struberg > wrote: > > > hi! > > > > we still have some old outdated OWB snapshots around > on minotaur. They are > > not in use anymore, but since we still use old plugins > which register > > 'apache.snapshots' for this old repository location, > we get some mixup in > > the maven-metadata which causes problems. > > > > One solution would be to completely drop all our old > snapshot artifacts > > from the old repo. wdyt? > > > > LieGrue, > > strub > > > > > > > > >
Re: old OWB snapshots on minotaur
I'm going to have to admit my lack of maven knowledge here a bit. What is the down side of dropping the old snapshot artifacts from the old repo? They would still be downloadable right, but you couldn't reference them from a recent pom.xml? Sincerely, Joe On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:43 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > hi! > > we still have some old outdated OWB snapshots around on minotaur. They are > not in use anymore, but since we still use old plugins which register > 'apache.snapshots' for this old repository location, we get some mixup in > the maven-metadata which causes problems. > > One solution would be to completely drop all our old snapshot artifacts > from the old repo. wdyt? > > LieGrue, > strub > > > >
old OWB snapshots on minotaur
hi! we still have some old outdated OWB snapshots around on minotaur. They are not in use anymore, but since we still use old plugins which register 'apache.snapshots' for this old repository location, we get some mixup in the maven-metadata which causes problems. One solution would be to completely drop all our old snapshot artifacts from the old repo. wdyt? LieGrue, strub
