Found it, its in the ASF parent: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/pom/tags/apache-7/pom.xml
So it should just work. The LICENSE, NOTICE, etc, are packed in the META-INF, in the sources bundle (per module): https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/archive/org/apache/shiro/shiro-core/1.0.0-incubating/shiro-core-1.0.0-incubating-sources.jar/!/META-INF/LICENSE NOTE: the shiro-all, sources doesn't have any source, it just contains the LICENSE, etc On a side note, can we get the "incubating" dropped from the version? This might confuse people, as Shiro well deserves a clean 1.0.0 stamp! On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Brian Demers <[email protected]>wrote: > > There were changes not to long ago so that maven would bundle an ASF > friendly bundle (as maven itself has the same requirements) > I'll see if i can dig it up. > > > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Gavin Hogan <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hey Les >> >> I thought maven does this pretty well via assembly - >> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-assembly-plugin/ >> >> Have never had reason to use this, just thought I would point it out. >> >> Good luck with the release.... >> >> Gavin >> >> >> >> From: >> Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> >> To: >> [email protected] >> Date: >> 05/20/2010 09:20 PM >> Subject: >> [SPAM] - Re: Preparing for our first release - Bayesian Filter detected >> spam >> >> >> >> Thanks for clarifying Craig. >> >> Is it common for this artifact to be auto-created during the build >> process? Or do people simply do an SVN checkout and create a .zip >> manually? >> >> Kalle, what do you guys do on Tapestry and/or Tynamo? >> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi Les, >> > >> > Official release artifacts are the sources to the shiro project. The >> maven >> > artifacts are considered optional binary releases. >> > >> > The contents of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shiro/trunk/ >> which >> > contains the LICENSE and NOTICE should be tar/zipped and optionally >> jarred. >> > Then each of the tar/jar files should be checksummed and signed with a >> > signing key using pgp, making sure the signing key is in the KEYS file. >> > >> > You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can evaluate >> them, >> > like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g. >> > people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001. >> > >> > Craig >> > >> > On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood 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 >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> > >> > Craig L Russell >> > Architect, Oracle >> > http://db.apache.org/jdo >> > 408 276-5638 mailto:[email protected] >> > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! >> > >> > >> >> >> >
