You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openmeetings.apache.org by "seba.wagner@gmail.com" <se...@gmail.com> on 2013/04/03 02:11:35 UTC
Structure of binaries and sources in dist folder
Hi Maxim,
could you plz check if our binaries and sources are correctly organized?
I am currently not sure, the other projects seem to have the structure:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/binaries/
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/sources/
while we do create a binary and source folder for each version.
I know this might be picky but its our first release and it is likely that
the conventions we make now will stay like that forever.
So are we going to create a separate folder for each release?
So https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.1/bin
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.2/bin
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.3/bin
Is that in line with the ASF docs ?
The other projects seem to cut the 0 in the name of the release. We have it
now with the folder name 2.1 and the package itself is called 2.1.0. Please
decide for either one :)
Either you call the folder (if there is one for each release) 2.1.0 and the
package 2.1.0 or call the folder 2.1 and the package has the name 2.1 :)
Thanks,
Sebastian
--
Sebastian Wagner
https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
http://www.webbase-design.de
http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
seba.wagner@gmail.com
Re: Structure of binaries and sources in dist folder
Posted by Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>.
done
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>wrote:
> OK, so the only change I made is renaming 2.1 to be 2.1.0.
> Is this correct?
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:48 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> yes,
>>
>> sounds good. I will probably need 2-3 days to create some article, but
>> that should be fine actually.
>>
>> Sebastian
>>
>>
>> 2013/4/3 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>
>>
>>> Here is the example:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/tomcat/tomcat-7/v7.0.39/
>>> The structure is our own responsibility :)
>>> Since I need to rename 2.1 to 2.1.0 I can move source out of src as made
>>> here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/wicket/6.6.0/
>>>
>>> I'll update website and will write announce
>>>
>>> Can you write to the blog and to press@a.o ?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:21 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah,
>>>>
>>>> I did not really expect that this folder structure of the RC candidate
>>>> will be exactly the folder structure of our distribution area.
>>>> Is there an example of any Apache Project that does organize the
>>>> sources and binaries like that?
>>>> If yes then we might be able to continue the release process.
>>>> If not we might simply change the structure and wait another 24 horus
>>>> for the mirrors to sync.
>>>>
>>>> There is also plenty of other stuff todo:
>>>> - updating the website as soon as the mirrors have synced
>>>> - Writing the announce message to several lists
>>>> - catching up with the press team at press@apache.org to find out how
>>>> we can work together and provide them with nice article for our first
>>>> release
>>>> - write a nice blog post at blogs.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> That is what comes to my mind. Actually those tasks are not all part of
>>>> the todos of the release manager. Anybody of us can take care of for
>>>> example writing the blog post.
>>>>
>>>> Sebastian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/4/3 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Sebastian,
>>>>>
>>>>> While creating file/folder structure I inspected some other projects,
>>>>> flex, wicket, tomcat, mina etc.all of them have binaries and sources
>>>>> somehow separated, I'll rename the folder in the dist as soon as we will
>>>>> agree on folder structure (was hope the structure was reviewed on release
>>>>> candidates ...) since it blocks announce (mirrors need to be synced)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 7:11 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>>>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Maxim,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> could you plz check if our binaries and sources are correctly
>>>>>> organized?
>>>>>> I am currently not sure, the other projects seem to have the
>>>>>> structure:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/binaries/
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/sources/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> while we do create a binary and source folder for each version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know this might be picky but its our first release and it is likely
>>>>>> that the conventions we make now will stay like that forever.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So are we going to create a separate folder for each release?
>>>>>> So https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.1/bin
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.2/bin
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.3/bin
>>>>>> Is that in line with the ASF docs ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The other projects seem to cut the 0 in the name of the release. We
>>>>>> have it now with the folder name 2.1 and the package itself is called
>>>>>> 2.1.0. Please decide for either one :)
>>>>>> Either you call the folder (if there is one for each release) 2.1.0
>>>>>> and the package 2.1.0 or call the folder 2.1 and the package has the name
>>>>>> 2.1 :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Sebastian
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Sebastian Wagner
>>>>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>>>>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>>>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>>>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> WBR
>>>>> Maxim aka solomax
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sebastian Wagner
>>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> WBR
>>> Maxim aka solomax
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sebastian Wagner
>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Re: Structure of binaries and sources in dist folder
Posted by Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>.
OK, so the only change I made is renaming 2.1 to be 2.1.0.
Is this correct?
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:48 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
> yes,
>
> sounds good. I will probably need 2-3 days to create some article, but
> that should be fine actually.
>
> Sebastian
>
>
> 2013/4/3 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>
>
>> Here is the example:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/tomcat/tomcat-7/v7.0.39/
>> The structure is our own responsibility :)
>> Since I need to rename 2.1 to 2.1.0 I can move source out of src as made
>> here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/wicket/6.6.0/
>>
>> I'll update website and will write announce
>>
>> Can you write to the blog and to press@a.o ?
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:21 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah,
>>>
>>> I did not really expect that this folder structure of the RC candidate
>>> will be exactly the folder structure of our distribution area.
>>> Is there an example of any Apache Project that does organize the
>>> sources and binaries like that?
>>> If yes then we might be able to continue the release process.
>>> If not we might simply change the structure and wait another 24 horus
>>> for the mirrors to sync.
>>>
>>> There is also plenty of other stuff todo:
>>> - updating the website as soon as the mirrors have synced
>>> - Writing the announce message to several lists
>>> - catching up with the press team at press@apache.org to find out how
>>> we can work together and provide them with nice article for our first
>>> release
>>> - write a nice blog post at blogs.apache.org
>>>
>>> That is what comes to my mind. Actually those tasks are not all part of
>>> the todos of the release manager. Anybody of us can take care of for
>>> example writing the blog post.
>>>
>>> Sebastian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/4/3 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> Hello Sebastian,
>>>>
>>>> While creating file/folder structure I inspected some other projects,
>>>> flex, wicket, tomcat, mina etc.all of them have binaries and sources
>>>> somehow separated, I'll rename the folder in the dist as soon as we will
>>>> agree on folder structure (was hope the structure was reviewed on release
>>>> candidates ...) since it blocks announce (mirrors need to be synced)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 7:11 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Maxim,
>>>>>
>>>>> could you plz check if our binaries and sources are correctly
>>>>> organized?
>>>>> I am currently not sure, the other projects seem to have the structure:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/binaries/
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/sources/
>>>>>
>>>>> while we do create a binary and source folder for each version.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know this might be picky but its our first release and it is likely
>>>>> that the conventions we make now will stay like that forever.
>>>>>
>>>>> So are we going to create a separate folder for each release?
>>>>> So https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.1/bin
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.2/bin
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.3/bin
>>>>> Is that in line with the ASF docs ?
>>>>>
>>>>> The other projects seem to cut the 0 in the name of the release. We
>>>>> have it now with the folder name 2.1 and the package itself is called
>>>>> 2.1.0. Please decide for either one :)
>>>>> Either you call the folder (if there is one for each release) 2.1.0
>>>>> and the package 2.1.0 or call the folder 2.1 and the package has the name
>>>>> 2.1 :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Sebastian
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Sebastian Wagner
>>>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>>>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> WBR
>>>> Maxim aka solomax
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sebastian Wagner
>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> WBR
>> Maxim aka solomax
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Sebastian Wagner
> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> http://www.webbase-design.de
> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Re: Structure of binaries and sources in dist folder
Posted by "seba.wagner@gmail.com" <se...@gmail.com>.
yes,
sounds good. I will probably need 2-3 days to create some article, but that
should be fine actually.
Sebastian
2013/4/3 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>
> Here is the example:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/tomcat/tomcat-7/v7.0.39/
> The structure is our own responsibility :)
> Since I need to rename 2.1 to 2.1.0 I can move source out of src as made
> here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/wicket/6.6.0/
>
> I'll update website and will write announce
>
> Can you write to the blog and to press@a.o ?
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:21 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yeah,
>>
>> I did not really expect that this folder structure of the RC candidate
>> will be exactly the folder structure of our distribution area.
>> Is there an example of any Apache Project that does organize the sources
>> and binaries like that?
>> If yes then we might be able to continue the release process.
>> If not we might simply change the structure and wait another 24 horus for
>> the mirrors to sync.
>>
>> There is also plenty of other stuff todo:
>> - updating the website as soon as the mirrors have synced
>> - Writing the announce message to several lists
>> - catching up with the press team at press@apache.org to find out how
>> we can work together and provide them with nice article for our first
>> release
>> - write a nice blog post at blogs.apache.org
>>
>> That is what comes to my mind. Actually those tasks are not all part of
>> the todos of the release manager. Anybody of us can take care of for
>> example writing the blog post.
>>
>> Sebastian
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/4/3 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>
>>
>>> Hello Sebastian,
>>>
>>> While creating file/folder structure I inspected some other projects,
>>> flex, wicket, tomcat, mina etc.all of them have binaries and sources
>>> somehow separated, I'll rename the folder in the dist as soon as we will
>>> agree on folder structure (was hope the structure was reviewed on release
>>> candidates ...) since it blocks announce (mirrors need to be synced)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 7:11 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Maxim,
>>>>
>>>> could you plz check if our binaries and sources are correctly organized?
>>>> I am currently not sure, the other projects seem to have the structure:
>>>>
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/binaries/
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/sources/
>>>>
>>>> while we do create a binary and source folder for each version.
>>>>
>>>> I know this might be picky but its our first release and it is likely
>>>> that the conventions we make now will stay like that forever.
>>>>
>>>> So are we going to create a separate folder for each release?
>>>> So https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.1/bin
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.2/bin
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.3/bin
>>>> Is that in line with the ASF docs ?
>>>>
>>>> The other projects seem to cut the 0 in the name of the release. We
>>>> have it now with the folder name 2.1 and the package itself is called
>>>> 2.1.0. Please decide for either one :)
>>>> Either you call the folder (if there is one for each release) 2.1.0 and
>>>> the package 2.1.0 or call the folder 2.1 and the package has the name 2.1 :)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Sebastian
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sebastian Wagner
>>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> WBR
>>> Maxim aka solomax
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sebastian Wagner
>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
>
--
Sebastian Wagner
https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
http://www.webbase-design.de
http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
seba.wagner@gmail.com
Re: Structure of binaries and sources in dist folder
Posted by Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>.
Here is the example:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/tomcat/tomcat-7/v7.0.39/
The structure is our own responsibility :)
Since I need to rename 2.1 to 2.1.0 I can move source out of src as made
here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/wicket/6.6.0/
I'll update website and will write announce
Can you write to the blog and to press@a.o ?
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:21 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah,
>
> I did not really expect that this folder structure of the RC candidate
> will be exactly the folder structure of our distribution area.
> Is there an example of any Apache Project that does organize the sources
> and binaries like that?
> If yes then we might be able to continue the release process.
> If not we might simply change the structure and wait another 24 horus for
> the mirrors to sync.
>
> There is also plenty of other stuff todo:
> - updating the website as soon as the mirrors have synced
> - Writing the announce message to several lists
> - catching up with the press team at press@apache.org to find out how we
> can work together and provide them with nice article for our first release
> - write a nice blog post at blogs.apache.org
>
> That is what comes to my mind. Actually those tasks are not all part of
> the todos of the release manager. Anybody of us can take care of for
> example writing the blog post.
>
> Sebastian
>
>
>
> 2013/4/3 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>
>
>> Hello Sebastian,
>>
>> While creating file/folder structure I inspected some other projects,
>> flex, wicket, tomcat, mina etc.all of them have binaries and sources
>> somehow separated, I'll rename the folder in the dist as soon as we will
>> agree on folder structure (was hope the structure was reviewed on release
>> candidates ...) since it blocks announce (mirrors need to be synced)
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 7:11 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Maxim,
>>>
>>> could you plz check if our binaries and sources are correctly organized?
>>> I am currently not sure, the other projects seem to have the structure:
>>>
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/binaries/
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/sources/
>>>
>>> while we do create a binary and source folder for each version.
>>>
>>> I know this might be picky but its our first release and it is likely
>>> that the conventions we make now will stay like that forever.
>>>
>>> So are we going to create a separate folder for each release?
>>> So https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.1/bin
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.2/bin
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.3/bin
>>> Is that in line with the ASF docs ?
>>>
>>> The other projects seem to cut the 0 in the name of the release. We have
>>> it now with the folder name 2.1 and the package itself is called 2.1.0.
>>> Please decide for either one :)
>>> Either you call the folder (if there is one for each release) 2.1.0 and
>>> the package 2.1.0 or call the folder 2.1 and the package has the name 2.1 :)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sebastian
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sebastian Wagner
>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> WBR
>> Maxim aka solomax
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Sebastian Wagner
> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> http://www.webbase-design.de
> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Re: Structure of binaries and sources in dist folder
Posted by "seba.wagner@gmail.com" <se...@gmail.com>.
Yeah,
I did not really expect that this folder structure of the RC candidate will
be exactly the folder structure of our distribution area.
Is there an example of any Apache Project that does organize the sources
and binaries like that?
If yes then we might be able to continue the release process.
If not we might simply change the structure and wait another 24 horus for
the mirrors to sync.
There is also plenty of other stuff todo:
- updating the website as soon as the mirrors have synced
- Writing the announce message to several lists
- catching up with the press team at press@apache.org to find out how we
can work together and provide them with nice article for our first release
- write a nice blog post at blogs.apache.org
That is what comes to my mind. Actually those tasks are not all part of the
todos of the release manager. Anybody of us can take care of for example
writing the blog post.
Sebastian
2013/4/3 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>
> Hello Sebastian,
>
> While creating file/folder structure I inspected some other projects,
> flex, wicket, tomcat, mina etc.all of them have binaries and sources
> somehow separated, I'll rename the folder in the dist as soon as we will
> agree on folder structure (was hope the structure was reviewed on release
> candidates ...) since it blocks announce (mirrors need to be synced)
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 7:11 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Maxim,
>>
>> could you plz check if our binaries and sources are correctly organized?
>> I am currently not sure, the other projects seem to have the structure:
>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/binaries/
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/sources/
>>
>> while we do create a binary and source folder for each version.
>>
>> I know this might be picky but its our first release and it is likely
>> that the conventions we make now will stay like that forever.
>>
>> So are we going to create a separate folder for each release?
>> So https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.1/bin
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.2/bin
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.3/bin
>> Is that in line with the ASF docs ?
>>
>> The other projects seem to cut the 0 in the name of the release. We have
>> it now with the folder name 2.1 and the package itself is called 2.1.0.
>> Please decide for either one :)
>> Either you call the folder (if there is one for each release) 2.1.0 and
>> the package 2.1.0 or call the folder 2.1 and the package has the name 2.1 :)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sebastian
>>
>> --
>> Sebastian Wagner
>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
>
--
Sebastian Wagner
https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
http://www.webbase-design.de
http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
seba.wagner@gmail.com
Re: Structure of binaries and sources in dist folder
Posted by Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>.
Hello Sebastian,
While creating file/folder structure I inspected some other projects, flex,
wicket, tomcat, mina etc.all of them have binaries and sources somehow
separated, I'll rename the folder in the dist as soon as we will agree on
folder structure (was hope the structure was reviewed on release candidates
...) since it blocks announce (mirrors need to be synced)
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 7:11 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <seba.wagner@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Hi Maxim,
>
> could you plz check if our binaries and sources are correctly organized?
> I am currently not sure, the other projects seem to have the structure:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/binaries/
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/rave/sources/
>
> while we do create a binary and source folder for each version.
>
> I know this might be picky but its our first release and it is likely that
> the conventions we make now will stay like that forever.
>
> So are we going to create a separate folder for each release?
> So https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.1/bin
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.2/bin
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openmeetings/2.3/bin
> Is that in line with the ASF docs ?
>
> The other projects seem to cut the 0 in the name of the release. We have
> it now with the folder name 2.1 and the package itself is called 2.1.0.
> Please decide for either one :)
> Either you call the folder (if there is one for each release) 2.1.0 and
> the package 2.1.0 or call the folder 2.1 and the package has the name 2.1 :)
>
> Thanks,
> Sebastian
>
> --
> Sebastian Wagner
> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> http://www.webbase-design.de
> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax