On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for your time Phil, comments below ...
>
> On 5/16/08, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 5:08 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > This is a vote to release the following artifacts as Commons SCXML 0.8:
>> >
>> > http://people.apache.org/builds/commons/scxml/0.8/RC2/
>> >
>> > ------------
>>
>> > [ X] +1 for release
>>
>> > [ ] +0
>> > [ ] -0
>> > [ ] -1 for release because...
>> > ------------
>> >
>>
>>
>> Checked sigs, hashes, tag, m1, m2, Ant builds - all fine. I assume
>> the OSGi stuff in the jar manifest is OK, despite funny formatting.
>> Please someone verify.
>>
> <snip/>
>
> AIUI, the OSGi plugin just enforces the manifest line width
> restrictions. Ofcourse, happy to have more people verify.
>
>
>> I guess its the release plugin that does this:
>>
>> <connection>scm:svn:http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/scxml/tags/SCXML_0_8_RC2</connection>
>> ?
>>
> <snap/>
>
> Yes, but under my tutelage, so I'll take all the blame on this one :-)
>
> I did spend some time thinking about this beforehand. Of these two approaches:
>
> 1. Tag each RC as if it were the final / release tag. Delete tag if
> RC++, and redo.
> 2. Tag RCs as RCs. Copy tag for passing RC as release tag.
>
> ... I personally prefer the latter, since:
>
> * I don't like the idea of a release tag existing before a release
> passes muster
> * I think its good housekeeping to retain RC tags
>
>
>> The site builds fine from the source distro, but will point to the RC2
>> tag in project info. I guess this is OK, since the tag is going to be
>> copied on release.
>>
> <snip/>
>
> Yes, it'll be copied to SCXML_0_8 if vote passes. The way the Commons
> SCXML site on c.a.o is deployed, its always the latest / snapshot
> (there are separate pointers in site navbar for release documentation,
> such as Javadocs), so the c.a.o site will have the correct bits in
> project info. Folks building from 0.8 source will indeed get the RC2
> tag (the tag will not be removed).
IMO this is another reason to not use the release plugin - along with
the facts that 1) if you don't remember to do a "dryRun" it may remove
the license header and 2) it generates an awful lot of commit noise to
just change the version number. The only downside to manually
releasing IMo is that you have to hand-edit the maven-metadata.xml.
While its not a show-stopper that the pom points to the RC2 tag - its
not desirable at all - but if people to want to use the release plugin
then IMO it would be much better to do the svn tag manually and skip
the "release:prepare" step altogether. AIUI you can run the
release:perform and specify the tag on the command line, something
like
mvn -Prc -Dtag=SCXML_0_8_RC2 release:perform
Niall
> Finally, if anyone wants to discuss tagging with the release plugin
> any more (though not too much more :-), I'm happy to do that in a new
> thread.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
