It looks like the maven artifacts to support the recent changes made to the documentation (adding targetFilterLifecycle parameter to DelegatingFilterProxy) have not been updated: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SHIRO/Spring
The latest snapshot available in the repository I'm using is 172, and doesn't work if I make this change to my spring config (I get an IllegalArgumentException): https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/shiro/shiro-core/1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT/ I've been waiting for a new snapshot to appear, but it hasn't yet and it's been several hours. Is this because snapshots are now going to here instead? https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/ I guess I'm just wanting to know what repository I should be using, or if that is still in flux. Thanks, Tauren On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >
