Hi Crag, I wasn't thinking it would be part of the maven repo directly, but it is nicely packaged up there:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/org/apache/shiro/shiro-root/1.0.0-incubating/ You'll see the .zip and its signatures and checksums. Cheers, Les On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Craig L Russell <[email protected]> wrote: > > On May 20, 2010, at 7:32 PM, Kalle Korhonen wrote: > >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> 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. >> >> That's exactly what the staging repository is for. > > Except that I didn't see anything in the staging repo that looks like a > gzip/jar with checksums and signatures. Maybe you can point it out to me. > > Thanks, > > Craig >> >> Kalle >> >> >>> 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! >>> >>> > > Craig L Russell > Architect, Oracle > http://db.apache.org/jdo > 408 276-5638 mailto:[email protected] > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > >
