On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Richard S. Hall <he...@ungoverned.org> wrote: > On 11/21/11 09:41 , ant elder wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Karl Pauls<karlpa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 3:08 PM, ant elder<antel...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Well IMHO i don't think this release demonstrates that the poddling >>>> has an understanding of making or reviewing ASF releases and thats the >>>> point of requiring releases during incubation. >>> >>> So you want us to do a new release? Fine, whatever, we can just roll a >>> new release which has the source distribution configured. That was a >>> mistake in the first place as it makes the bundles not easily >>> individually buildable. >>> >>> However, we still will not have a combined source release as we want >>> to be able to release our bundles individually. Is that the resolution >>> then? All we have to do is a do a micro release with the source >>> distribution configured on a per artifact level? >>> >> I agree the requirement for a single source release doesn't seem >> totally clear, I've said I think you should have one and so has sebb, >> it would be good to hear what other Incubator PMC people think. I >> think you need one for two main reasons: >> >> 1) The ASF deals with source and the releases are how users get hold >> of that source. If a user is going to do development with the released >> ACE source they likely aren't going to be able to do very much useful >> with just single things like org.apache.ace.repository.imp. At the >> very least they're probably going to want >> org.apache.ace.repository.api too but likely there is a big network of >> the 60 something ACE modules that anyone doing most non-trivial ACE >> development is going to want. One source distribution makes this easy, >> making them have to download them all separately isn't particularly >> practical. That https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ace/trunk/ >> is structured so the ASF committers can work with them as one single >> buildable checkout i think shows thats true. >> >> 2) If there is only individually buildable source for each jar how are >> people really going to verify that the release is actually buildable >> and the artifacts match the SVN tag source when reviewing and voting >> on release votes? No one reviewing is really likely to download 60 >> separate distros and build them all one by one are they? > > I disagree. There seems to be some misunderstanding that there is one single > product that must be built. > > When you develop independently evolving modules, "big bang" releases do not > make sense. Each module has its own release cycle. Occasionally you may end > up creating some sort of "distribution" out of the modules and release that, > but that is just one potential distribution. >
I agree thats an approach used and works in many projects but if that was really the case _here_ then surely the SVN would be structured so that there were separate trunk/branch/tag folders for each module, there would have been more releases than just the single 0.8.0 release, and there would be separate release votes for each module being released. ...ant --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
