Le mardi 16 septembre 2008, Xavier Hanin a écrit : > On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Nicolas Lalevée > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > wrote: > > > > Le mardi 16 septembre 2008, Xavier Hanin a écrit : > > > I have built a release candidate for Ivy 2.0.0-rc1 > > > > > > You can download it from this URL: > > > http://people.apache.org/~xavier/ivy/staging/2.0.0-rc1/ > > > > > > A maven 2 staging repo with this release is available here: > > > http://people.apache.org/~xavier/m2-staging-repo/ > > > A staging eclipse update site with this release is available here: > > > http://people.apache.org/~xavier/updatesite-staging/ > > > The bundle version is 2.0.0.cr1. > > > > > > Do you vote for the release of these binaries? > > > > +1 > > > > > [X] Yes > > > [ ] No > > > > I have tested successfully Ivy in ant and in an Eclipse environment with > > the > > released IvyDE-alpha1. > > > > I have just concerns about the deployment of the updatesite. > > > > First the staging updatesite won't work as expected, as it is still > > pointing > > to the apache mirrors, which don't contains yet the new binaries. So the > > Eclipse update installer won't show the new Ivy RC1. Actually this > > staging updatesite will only work correctly as soon as deployed also on > > the mirrors, > > which make it not a very staging one. > > It is in fact my fault, the documentation talk about non mirroring of the > > staging updatesite, but the way to resolve it assume that the site.xml > > have relative urls, but the current one have absolute ones. I will fix > > it. > > Indeed, I dumbly followed the steps in the documentation you wrote. If you > can tell me what to put in the site.xml, I'll update it so that others can > test it.
I have fixed the site.xml in svn. Just svn update it (the changes should be merged with your local ones), and scp it to the staging updatesite. > > And I have found an issue with the signature of an artifact: > > > > updatesite-staging/plugins/org.apache.ivyde.eclipse_2.0.0.alpha1.jar.pack > >.gz I think that you launch the optimize task, but it was not signed > > again. I think the better way to work with it is to svn-revert the > > changes done by the > > optimize task for the already released jars, and then no need to sign it > > again. > > Indeed, I only signed the new release, I thought the current IvyDE release > wouldn't be touched. Hence I've svn reverted these files on my working > copy, and uploaded them in the update site. Since this is not what the vote > is really on anyway, I don't think we need to cast a new vote. If anybody > thinks casting a new vote is necessary, please tell me so. I don't think a new vote is needed too, that's why I still voted +1. cheers, Nicolas > > Xavier > > > I will update the documentation about this step. > > > > Nicolas > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
