Awesome! But I just thought of a question: what is/are our official release artifact(s)? Most people would expect a .zip so they can download instead of being forced to use Maven, right? We used to have a jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously. What is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE, README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/ source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right? Our build doesn't currently make these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional ASF practice. - Les On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen <[email protected]> wrote: > Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/ > > Kalle > > > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch. >> Tossing the ball back in to your court... >> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good. I'll commit in a >>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch. >>> >>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill. >>>> >>>> Kalle >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;) Thanks for doing the >>>>> rollback! >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think. Can you do the rollback >>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add >>>>>>> the fix to trunk? >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in the >>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch >>>>>> (hey you asked for it :) >>>>>> >>>>>> Kalle >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen >>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically >>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an >>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points >>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to >>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the >>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kalle >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to! But did you see this? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning >>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great. Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen >>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've >>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. >>>>>>>>>> Props >>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at >>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/ >>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at >>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> final location for the site. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email >>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at >>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since >>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more >>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute >>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before >>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Kalle >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen >>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven >>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see >>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html). >>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental >>>>>>>>>>> version >>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions >>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing >>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.0, >>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x >>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes >>>>>>>>>>> etc. >>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or >>>>>>>>>>> won't >>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch >>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Kalle >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood >>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're >>>>>>>>>>>> long >>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a >>>>>>>>>>>> crack >>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that >>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0. When I'm done with that, I'd like to >>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to >>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up if >>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should >>>>>>>>>>>> concretely >>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible >>>>>>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>>>>>> now. Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish >>>>>>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, >>>>>>>>>>>> I'll >>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Les >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
