I added a testcase for the update site to our test plan. And when I tested it, it failed... but it's now fixed. Problem was that there were several more files (feature.xml, site.xml) that had hardcoded in them the previous (wrong) version number.
-Marshall Michael Baessler wrote: > Marshall Schor wrote: >> The "site.xml" file in the project uimaj-eclipse-update-site had to have >> a value stating where the update site is located. It currently says: >> >> http://incubator.apache.org/uima/downloads/eclipse-update-site >> >> Part of our release process needs to move the files from the >> uimaj-eclipse-update-site/target directory to that update site. >> > Seems to be a similar step as moving some release artifacts to the > maven repository. >> I think that our set of released artifacts that should be >> scanned-with-RAT / reviewed should include the artifacts for the update >> site. Do others agree? >> >> If so, can Michael add a directory for the update site artifacts to the >> release candidate at >> people.a.o:/home/mbaessler/distributions/uimaj-2.2.1/03 , or something >> else that's better? >> > I added the update site artifacts to > people.a.o:/home/mbaessler/distributions/uimaj-2.2.1/03/eclipseUpdateSite >> Unless someone wants to offer contrary opinions, I'll post to >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] a question about having our next release include an >> eclipse update site, and if its OK to have it at the >> http://incubator.apache.org/uima/downloads/eclipse-update-site >> location. I see that other projects do this kind of thing. But I've >> also seen that all "distributions" have to be in specific places. >> > Fine with me. Go ahead a ask on the incubator list. > > I think if we have now an update site, we should also add a test case > to the test plan for this. > > -- Michael > >
