On 3/21/08, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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. > > > > 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. > > > > > Another thing to consider is that the release plugin isn't written > specifically for apache commons or the ASF in general, nor should it > be. Maven is designed to be a general-purpose build system for all > projects. We could consider writing our own release plugin which > enforces/supports our release process. It shouldn't be that tough, if > that's what it comes down to. I think the maven release plugin's > philosophy of cutting/deploying releases differs from ours. > <snip/>
I believe with the release of the maven-stage-plugin (a month or so ago), we may be in decent shape and not need to roll anything (but, yes, thats an option if needed). The release plugin can do relevant bits in [B] and the stage plugin relevant bits in [D]. -Rahul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
