On 3/21/08, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If I raise my view and just look at the A, B, C and D headings, it > sounds good. But, there shouldn't be two options under B. IMO we should > always use the release plugin. That will give us consistent releases. > <snip/>
Or consistently not using it ;-) But in hindsight, I shouldn't have put that option in [B] on the table since its serving as a distraction. I am OK with removing it. -Rahul > Should something be wrong with the release-plugin we'll be consistently > wrong :-) But bugs are meant to be fixed, so that shouldn't be a problem > in the long run. > > > > Rahul Akolkar wrote: > > Based on couple of JIRA comments, it seems there still isn't consensus > > about a release process using m2 at Commons. I'll try to outline the > > process. > > > > <outline> > > > > [A] Release prep > > > > [B] Stage artifacts and site, to some location TBD (entire commands > > below, not abridged etc.): > > > > mvn -Prc release:prepare > > mvn -Prc release:perform > > mvn -Prc site-deploy > > > > Or, if you don't care about the release plugin, after setting final > > versions in [A]: > > > > mvn -Prc deploy > > mvn -Prc site-deploy > > > > [C] Vote > > > > [D] Go live > > > > mvn stage:copy ... > > mvn site-deploy > > > > </outline> > > > > Does this fit your mental model? If not, why not? > > > > Please keep the discussion at a "vision" level. Yes, the outline is > > flawed (all votes don't pass, there are loops etc.) Yes, required pom > > changes are not discussed. But, once process is OK'ed, we will make > > the poms do the right thing :-) > > > > -Rahul > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
