Re: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and 2.9
Uwe, the signatures are fine though. We should move forward and open a vote for the artifacts. Grant, are you going to do this? simon On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 11:47 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote: > I rebuilt the maven-dir for 2.9.1 and 3.0.0, merged them (3.0.0 is top-level > version) and extracted only fast-vector-highlighter: > > http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ > > I will copy this dir to the maven folder on people.a.o, when I got votes > (how many)? At least someone should check the signatures. > > By the way, we have a small error in our ant build.xml that inserts > svnversion into the manifest file. This version is not the version of the > last changed item (would be svnversion -c) but the current svn version, even > that I checked out the corresponding tags. It's no problem at all, but not > very nice. > > Maybe we should change build.xml to call "svnversion -c" in future, to get > the real number. > > Uwe > > - > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsing...@apache.org] >> Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 10:26 PM >> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and 2.9 >> >> I suppose we could put up the artifacts on a dev site and then we could >> vote to release both of them pretty quickly. I think that should be easy >> to do, since it pretty much only involves verifying the jar and the >> signatures. >> >> On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Simon Willnauer wrote: >> >> > hi folks, >> > The maven artifacts for fast-vector-highlighter have never been pushed >> > since it was released because there were no pom.xml.template inside >> > the module. I added a pom file a day ago in the context of >> > LUCENE-2107. I already talked to uwe and grant how to deal with this >> > issues and if we should push the artifact for Lucene 2.9 / 3.0. Since >> > this is only a metadata file we could consider rebuilding the >> > artefacts and publish them for those releases. I can not remember that >> > anything like that happened before, so we should discuss how to deal >> > with this situation and if we should wait until 3.1. >> > >> > simon >> > >> > - >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> > >> >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
RE: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and 2.9
I rebuilt the maven-dir for 2.9.1 and 3.0.0, merged them (3.0.0 is top-level version) and extracted only fast-vector-highlighter: http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ I will copy this dir to the maven folder on people.a.o, when I got votes (how many)? At least someone should check the signatures. By the way, we have a small error in our ant build.xml that inserts svnversion into the manifest file. This version is not the version of the last changed item (would be svnversion -c) but the current svn version, even that I checked out the corresponding tags. It's no problem at all, but not very nice. Maybe we should change build.xml to call "svnversion -c" in future, to get the real number. Uwe - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > -Original Message- > From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsing...@apache.org] > Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 10:26 PM > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and 2.9 > > I suppose we could put up the artifacts on a dev site and then we could > vote to release both of them pretty quickly. I think that should be easy > to do, since it pretty much only involves verifying the jar and the > signatures. > > On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Simon Willnauer wrote: > > > hi folks, > > The maven artifacts for fast-vector-highlighter have never been pushed > > since it was released because there were no pom.xml.template inside > > the module. I added a pom file a day ago in the context of > > LUCENE-2107. I already talked to uwe and grant how to deal with this > > issues and if we should push the artifact for Lucene 2.9 / 3.0. Since > > this is only a metadata file we could consider rebuilding the > > artefacts and publish them for those releases. I can not remember that > > anything like that happened before, so we should discuss how to deal > > with this situation and if we should wait until 3.1. > > > > simon > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
RE: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and 2.9
I will regenerate both artifacts and publish in my people.a.o home (2.9.1 and 3.0, but not 2.9.0). Also 2.9.0? Thats not what you want! Uwe - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > -Original Message- > From: Simon Willnauer [mailto:simon.willna...@googlemail.com] > Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 10:34 PM > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and 2.9 > > On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Grant Ingersoll > wrote: > > I suppose we could put up the artifacts on a dev site and then we could > vote to release both of them pretty quickly. I think that should be easy > to do, since it pretty much only involves verifying the jar and the > signatures. > Yep - that might be the best solution as it does not change code > though. Whoever volunteers to do so has to checkout the same revision > to make sure it is the same code while I doubt that we had changes in > fast-vector-highlighter in the branch. -- Doh! no change in 3.0 branch > but in 2.9. > > simon > > > > On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Simon Willnauer wrote: > > > >> hi folks, > >> The maven artifacts for fast-vector-highlighter have never been pushed > >> since it was released because there were no pom.xml.template inside > >> the module. I added a pom file a day ago in the context of > >> LUCENE-2107. I already talked to uwe and grant how to deal with this > >> issues and if we should push the artifact for Lucene 2.9 / 3.0. Since > >> this is only a metadata file we could consider rebuilding the > >> artefacts and publish them for those releases. I can not remember that > >> anything like that happened before, so we should discuss how to deal > >> with this situation and if we should wait until 3.1. > >> > >> simon > >> > >> - > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >> > > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and 2.9
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote: > I suppose we could put up the artifacts on a dev site and then we could vote > to release both of them pretty quickly. I think that should be easy to do, > since it pretty much only involves verifying the jar and the signatures. Yep - that might be the best solution as it does not change code though. Whoever volunteers to do so has to checkout the same revision to make sure it is the same code while I doubt that we had changes in fast-vector-highlighter in the branch. -- Doh! no change in 3.0 branch but in 2.9. simon > > On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Simon Willnauer wrote: > >> hi folks, >> The maven artifacts for fast-vector-highlighter have never been pushed >> since it was released because there were no pom.xml.template inside >> the module. I added a pom file a day ago in the context of >> LUCENE-2107. I already talked to uwe and grant how to deal with this >> issues and if we should push the artifact for Lucene 2.9 / 3.0. Since >> this is only a metadata file we could consider rebuilding the >> artefacts and publish them for those releases. I can not remember that >> anything like that happened before, so we should discuss how to deal >> with this situation and if we should wait until 3.1. >> >> simon >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and 2.9
I suppose we could put up the artifacts on a dev site and then we could vote to release both of them pretty quickly. I think that should be easy to do, since it pretty much only involves verifying the jar and the signatures. On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Simon Willnauer wrote: > hi folks, > The maven artifacts for fast-vector-highlighter have never been pushed > since it was released because there were no pom.xml.template inside > the module. I added a pom file a day ago in the context of > LUCENE-2107. I already talked to uwe and grant how to deal with this > issues and if we should push the artifact for Lucene 2.9 / 3.0. Since > this is only a metadata file we could consider rebuilding the > artefacts and publish them for those releases. I can not remember that > anything like that happened before, so we should discuss how to deal > with this situation and if we should wait until 3.1. > > simon > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
