Very late, but I've been a tad busy in the new-parent department.
Generally I agree with Phil's email. I don't really care though - I
recognize that my main pain with Nexus is a) the experience to know
not to trust magical systems b) not being full of energy to follow
yet another build system
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Henri Yandell flame...@gmail.com wrote:
Very late, but I've been a tad busy in the new-parent department.
You didn't publish a POM yet, did you? ;-)
What I do care about is releasing often. Which is farcical given how
few times I've released. I want to
On 5 April 2011 09:32, Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Henri Yandell flame...@gmail.com wrote:
[Side note; this is insane:
http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-encryption.html - I vomit
every time it's implied I should put passwords in
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 2:37 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 April 2011 09:32, Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Henri Yandell flame...@gmail.com wrote:
[Side note; this is insane:
http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-encryption.html -
On 31 March 2011 04:00, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/30/11 6:57 PM, sebb wrote:
On 31 March 2011 01:38, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/30/11 4:22 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
I disagree
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 2:38 AM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
And then you need to check the hashes and sigs again since you are
now working with downloaded copies of the files that we voted on.
Seems much easier and more correct to me to just scp the files to
p.a.o., let people
On 31 March 2011 12:05, Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 1:36 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
AFAIK, wget alone won't do, as the files also have to be deleted.
Why? There's no problem with leaving them where they are.
If they are left in Nexus
On 31 March 2011 12:08, Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 2:38 AM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
And then you need to check the hashes and sigs again since you are
now working with downloaded copies of the files that we voted on.
Seems much
On Mar 31, 2011, at 8:49 AM, sebb wrote:
On 31 March 2011 12:08, Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 2:38 AM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
And then you need to check the hashes and sigs again since you are
now working with downloaded copies
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 5:46 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
If they are left in Nexus staging, AFAIK they end up in Maven Central
when promoted.
And your point is?
--
I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye)
-
On 31 March 2011 00:22, Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
I disagree with this. The most important artifacts are the
zips/tars that go to dist/. These *are* the ASF release. Nexus
makes it *harder* IMO
On 3/30/11 4:22 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
I disagree with this. The most important artifacts are the
zips/tars that go to dist/. These *are* the ASF release. Nexus
makes it *harder* IMO to maintain provenance of
On 31 March 2011 01:38, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/30/11 4:22 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
I disagree with this. The most important artifacts are the
zips/tars that go to dist/. These *are* the ASF
I'm seeing a lot of complaining on these threads but no actual proposal. If the
proposal is to move away from Maven/Nexus for a release for all of commons I'll
vote -1. OTOH, If some release managers want to do the release some other way
I'm not going to force them to use Maven/Nexus.
Ralph
On 3/30/11 6:57 PM, sebb wrote:
On 31 March 2011 01:38, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/30/11 4:22 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
I disagree with this. The most important artifacts are the
zips/tars that go
On 3/30/11 7:07 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
I'm seeing a lot of complaining on these threads but no actual proposal.
I started the thread with a proposal, which was to standardize on
the process documented on the web site. I know you don't like that
process and I am not going to insist that we force
After another nightmare by an RM who has not cut a release in a
while, I think we need to do something. The documentation on the
Commons web pages describes a process that works. I suggest that we
standardize on that process, adding some simple automation scripts
that RMs can choose to use or
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
After another nightmare by an RM who has not cut a release in a
while, I think we need to do something. The documentation on the
Commons web pages describes a process that works. I suggest that we
standardize on that
On 29 March 2011 16:02, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
After another nightmare by an RM who has not cut a release in a
while, I think we need to do something. The documentation on the
Commons web
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:08 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2011 16:02, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
After another nightmare by an RM who has not cut a release in a
while, I think we
On Mar 29, 2011, at 8:08 AM, sebb wrote:
Yes, that is true.
Also, had the [net] release been using Nexus, it would have required 2
additional manual stages to close and then release the Maven
artifacts.
It is impossible to accidentally release Maven artifacts using Maven
command-line
On 29 March 2011 16:20, Matt Benson gudnabr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:08 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2011 16:02, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
After another
On 3/29/11 8:33 AM, sebb wrote:
On 29 March 2011 16:20, Matt Benson gudnabr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:08 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2011 16:02, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Phil Steitz
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:18 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2011 16:52, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/29/11 8:33 AM, sebb wrote:
On 29 March 2011 16:20, Matt Benson gudnabr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:08 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29
On 29 March 2011 18:33, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:18 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2011 16:52, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/29/11 8:33 AM, sebb wrote:
On 29 March 2011 16:20, Matt Benson gudnabr...@gmail.com
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 8:08 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2011 18:33, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:18 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2011 16:52, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/29/11 8:33 AM, sebb wrote:
On 29 March 2011 20:56, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 8:08 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2011 18:33, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:18 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2011 16:52,
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:23 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2011 20:56, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 8:08 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2011 18:33, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at
28 matches
Mail list logo
