You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@activemq.apache.org by Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net> on 2009/09/17 20:56:37 UTC
[VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Hi Everyone,
I've cut a release candidate for 5.3.0
Could you review the release artifacts and vote?
The release notes are here:
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/ActiveMQ+5.3.0+Release
You can get the binary distributions here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.3.0/
The Maven2 repository is at:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/
The Maven generated website for this version will be created first thing
tomorrow
Source SVN tag:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/activemq/tags/activemq-5.3.0
Please vote to approve this release binary
[ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0
[ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
Here's my +1
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
The only required part of an apache release is the source archive that
is sufficient to build the project. You don't make that easy to
find :-)..... its here
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/org/apache/activemq/activemq-parent/5.3.0/
I'd suggest just pointing to the staging repo
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030
so its clear that the vote is for the entire contents of the staging
repo.
I'd like to run the ee5 tck against geronimo + the activemq 5.3
release candidate, I'm hoping we can start tomorrow.
Also it seems to be strongly suggested that you check that the source
archive actually will build before voting +1 :-)
Since Guillaume has apparently decided to wait on the osgi changes
will you uncancel the vote? In geronimo we have concurrent votes
fairly often, just noting that one vote depends on another. We do try
to get the votes started in order :-)
Congratulations on getting this process started :-)
thanks
david jencks
On Sep 17, 2009, at 11:56 AM, Dejan Bosanac wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I've cut a release candidate for 5.3.0
>
> Could you review the release artifacts and vote?
>
> The release notes are here:
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/ActiveMQ+5.3.0+Release
>
> You can get the binary distributions here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.3.0/
>
> The Maven2 repository is at:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/
>
> The Maven generated website for this version will be created first
> thing
> tomorrow
>
> Source SVN tag:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/activemq/tags/activemq-5.3.0
>
> Please vote to approve this release binary
>
> [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
>
> Here's my +1
>
> Cheers
> --
> Dejan Bosanac
>
> Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
> ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
> Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
[CANCEL][VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net>.
Hi Hiram,
yes, remembered protofbuf afterwards and included it into reply (this was a
long day).
I'll cancel this vote and wait for Guillaume's changes as well.
But everyone are welcome to examine the artifacts in the meantime.
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Hiram Chirino <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Dejan,
>
> Since the release depends on activemq-protobuf...
> I might expedite things if you also include in the vote, the protobuf-1.0
> release that was staged to:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-026/org/apache/activemq/protobuf/activemq-protobuf/1.0/
>
> You should cancel this vote and restart with a fresh VOTE thread that
> includes both the releases.
>
> Regards,
> Hiram
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > I've cut a release candidate for 5.3.0
> >
> > Could you review the release artifacts and vote?
> >
> > The release notes are here:
> >
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/ActiveMQ+5.3.0+Release
> >
> > You can get the binary distributions here:
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.3.0/
> >
> > The Maven2 repository is at:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/
> >
> > The Maven generated website for this version will be created first thing
> > tomorrow
> >
> > Source SVN tag:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/activemq/tags/activemq-5.3.0
> >
> > Please vote to approve this release binary
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0
> > [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
> >
> > Here's my +1
> >
> > Cheers
> > --
> > Dejan Bosanac
> >
> > Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
> > ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
> > Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hiram
>
> Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
>
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com/
>
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Hiram Chirino <ch...@gmail.com>.
Hi Dejan,
Since the release depends on activemq-protobuf...
I might expedite things if you also include in the vote, the protobuf-1.0
release that was staged to:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-026/org/apache/activemq/protobuf/activemq-protobuf/1.0/
You should cancel this vote and restart with a fresh VOTE thread that
includes both the releases.
Regards,
Hiram
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I've cut a release candidate for 5.3.0
>
> Could you review the release artifacts and vote?
>
> The release notes are here:
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/ActiveMQ+5.3.0+Release
>
> You can get the binary distributions here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.3.0/
>
> The Maven2 repository is at:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/
>
> The Maven generated website for this version will be created first thing
> tomorrow
>
> Source SVN tag:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/activemq/tags/activemq-5.3.0
>
> Please vote to approve this release binary
>
> [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
>
> Here's my +1
>
> Cheers
> --
> Dejan Bosanac
>
> Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
> ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
> Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
>
--
Regards,
Hiram
Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com/
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net>.
Hi,
source archive builds just fine and maven site building is in the process.
The new vote call is posted on the list.
David, please let us know how ee5 tck went.
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net> wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> thanks for your input on this release. It was my mistake that after 12
> hours of trying to get all this packed, I rushed the vote email without
> enough info on protobuf dependency, building the source, etc. But we wanted
> to publish release artifacts for reviewing as soon as possible so we can
> have it tested and reviewed by other folks.
>
> I'll verify now that everything builds from source archives, build maven
> site (this can take a while because of cobertura reports) and write a new
> email with detailed description of all components of the build.
>
> Of course if anything else pops out in the meantime, we'll merge it and
> rebuild the staging repo.
>
> Cheers
> --
> Dejan Bosanac
>
> Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
> ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
> Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:28 AM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>> I went to some trouble a while back to set up the build to be more up to
>> date and use the latest release technology but I don't seem to have updated
>> the instructions. It looks to me as if the release candidate is technically
>> fine from the artifacts generated. As noted below, I'm strongly -1 on
>> releasing things labelled RC1 etc. Since Dejan has just gone through the
>> process he's probably best qualified to write accurate instructions but I
>> can have a go if people would prefer.
>>
>> On Sep 17, 2009, at 5:23 PM, Bruce Snyder wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Hiram Chirino <ch...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> It's been deployed to a staging repo. See my earlier reply about that
>>>> in
>>>> this thread.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Then we should probably vote on and release that module separately and
>>> before the full ActiveMQ release. The ActiveMQ release candidates
>>> shouldn't make use of candidate modules located in temporary repos.
>>>
>>
>> I don't see the point of this rule as long as the vote using the
>> not-yet-released artifact mentions that it depends on the
>> not-yet-released-artifact's vote. We do this all the time in geronimo.
>>
>>
>>> Also, why has there been no discussion regarding the preparation for
>>>>> this release on the dev list?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Isn't that what what's going on now?
>>>>
>>>> IMHO rolling release candidates is the best way to get folks engaged and
>>>> discussing the current state of the product and whats still missing.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>> As we have long seen in the History of ActiveMQ releases.. it typically
>>>> takes several release candidates before everyone's happy. I guess this
>>>> first release candidate was no different!
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>> My idea of a release candidate is a bunch of artifacts in a nexus staging
>> repo that we vote on. If the vote passes, we promote them, if the vote
>> fails we drop them and remove the tag they were built from. As such the
>> stuff in the repo and tag needs to be what we want to release, including
>> correct release version numbers.
>>
>> Agreed, release candidates are the best way to seek consensus for a
>>> release. To improve upon the way we go about handling releases, I'd
>>> like to suggest a couple minor changes:
>>>
>>> * Since tags are supposed to be a snapshot in time and therefore
>>> shouldn't change, I'd like to suggest that the tag name be changed to
>>> reflect the fact that it's a release candidate, e.g.,
>>> activemq-5.3.0-RC1, etc. Either that or we could instead work from a
>>> branch that can change as much as necessary until there's agreement on
>>> which candidate to release.
>>>
>>
>> I don't understand what you are suggesting here. Has someone proposed
>> changing the tag created by the release plugin?
>>
>>
>>> * I'd also like to suggest that tarballs and zips for each release
>>> candidate be labeled as such, e.g.,
>>> apache-activemq-5.3.0-RC1-bin.tar.gz,
>>> apache-activemq-5.3.0-RC2-bin.tar.gz, etc. This way there is no
>>> confusion and downloaded items are clearly marked as a release
>>> candidate and not a full 5.3 release.
>>>
>>
>> Unless you plan to publish these RCx as real releases after voting on
>> them, IMO this is a terrible idea. After we find something that's
>> acceptable we would have to remove the tag we just decided was OK and
>> re-release with a new name.
>>
>>
>>> Also, while we're discussing releases, we should make sure that the
>>> release guide reflects the latest practices:
>>>
>>> http://activemq.apache.org/release-guide.html
>>>
>>> I see that it needs to be updated to include the process for release
>>> candidates.
>>>
>>> That's why I'm grateful to anyone who take the initiative to start
>>>> rolling
>>>> the release candidates. They are basically taking on a tough job and
>>>> prodding the rest of to get involved the release!
>>>>
>>>
>> Releasing is amazingly time consuming, even with the latest greatest maven
>> tooling. I wouldn't have minded an email saying "I'm gonna push a release
>> candidate tomorrow" but this release has been on deck for months now.... I'm
>> not complaining now that there's some action.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> We really do need to start doing releases more often.
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1 to releasing more often. We should probably aim for more frequent
>>> minor releases, i.e., 5.2.1, 5.2.2, etc. so fixes are delivered
>>> faster.
>>>
>>
>> Wishing for more releases is great, but its hard to believe the amount of
>> time it takes to prepare a release candidate. I'll be really happy to see
>> 5.3 released.
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>>
>>> Bruce
>>> --
>>> perl -e 'print
>>> unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
>>> );'
>>>
>>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
>>> Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net>.
Hi David,
thanks for your input on this release. It was my mistake that after 12 hours
of trying to get all this packed, I rushed the vote email without enough
info on protobuf dependency, building the source, etc. But we wanted to
publish release artifacts for reviewing as soon as possible so we can have
it tested and reviewed by other folks.
I'll verify now that everything builds from source archives, build maven
site (this can take a while because of cobertura reports) and write a new
email with detailed description of all components of the build.
Of course if anything else pops out in the meantime, we'll merge it and
rebuild the staging repo.
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:28 AM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>wrote:
> I went to some trouble a while back to set up the build to be more up to
> date and use the latest release technology but I don't seem to have updated
> the instructions. It looks to me as if the release candidate is technically
> fine from the artifacts generated. As noted below, I'm strongly -1 on
> releasing things labelled RC1 etc. Since Dejan has just gone through the
> process he's probably best qualified to write accurate instructions but I
> can have a go if people would prefer.
>
> On Sep 17, 2009, at 5:23 PM, Bruce Snyder wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Hiram Chirino <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It's been deployed to a staging repo. See my earlier reply about that in
>>> this thread.
>>>
>>
>> Then we should probably vote on and release that module separately and
>> before the full ActiveMQ release. The ActiveMQ release candidates
>> shouldn't make use of candidate modules located in temporary repos.
>>
>
> I don't see the point of this rule as long as the vote using the
> not-yet-released artifact mentions that it depends on the
> not-yet-released-artifact's vote. We do this all the time in geronimo.
>
>
>> Also, why has there been no discussion regarding the preparation for
>>>> this release on the dev list?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Isn't that what what's going on now?
>>>
>>> IMHO rolling release candidates is the best way to get folks engaged and
>>> discussing the current state of the product and whats still missing.
>>>
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>> As we have long seen in the History of ActiveMQ releases.. it typically
>>> takes several release candidates before everyone's happy. I guess this
>>> first release candidate was no different!
>>>
>>
>>
> My idea of a release candidate is a bunch of artifacts in a nexus staging
> repo that we vote on. If the vote passes, we promote them, if the vote
> fails we drop them and remove the tag they were built from. As such the
> stuff in the repo and tag needs to be what we want to release, including
> correct release version numbers.
>
> Agreed, release candidates are the best way to seek consensus for a
>> release. To improve upon the way we go about handling releases, I'd
>> like to suggest a couple minor changes:
>>
>> * Since tags are supposed to be a snapshot in time and therefore
>> shouldn't change, I'd like to suggest that the tag name be changed to
>> reflect the fact that it's a release candidate, e.g.,
>> activemq-5.3.0-RC1, etc. Either that or we could instead work from a
>> branch that can change as much as necessary until there's agreement on
>> which candidate to release.
>>
>
> I don't understand what you are suggesting here. Has someone proposed
> changing the tag created by the release plugin?
>
>
>> * I'd also like to suggest that tarballs and zips for each release
>> candidate be labeled as such, e.g.,
>> apache-activemq-5.3.0-RC1-bin.tar.gz,
>> apache-activemq-5.3.0-RC2-bin.tar.gz, etc. This way there is no
>> confusion and downloaded items are clearly marked as a release
>> candidate and not a full 5.3 release.
>>
>
> Unless you plan to publish these RCx as real releases after voting on them,
> IMO this is a terrible idea. After we find something that's acceptable we
> would have to remove the tag we just decided was OK and re-release with a
> new name.
>
>
>> Also, while we're discussing releases, we should make sure that the
>> release guide reflects the latest practices:
>>
>> http://activemq.apache.org/release-guide.html
>>
>> I see that it needs to be updated to include the process for release
>> candidates.
>>
>> That's why I'm grateful to anyone who take the initiative to start
>>> rolling
>>> the release candidates. They are basically taking on a tough job and
>>> prodding the rest of to get involved the release!
>>>
>>
> Releasing is amazingly time consuming, even with the latest greatest maven
> tooling. I wouldn't have minded an email saying "I'm gonna push a release
> candidate tomorrow" but this release has been on deck for months now.... I'm
> not complaining now that there's some action.
>
>
>
>>> We really do need to start doing releases more often.
>>>
>>
>> +1 to releasing more often. We should probably aim for more frequent
>> minor releases, i.e., 5.2.1, 5.2.2, etc. so fixes are delivered
>> faster.
>>
>
> Wishing for more releases is great, but its hard to believe the amount of
> time it takes to prepare a release candidate. I'll be really happy to see
> 5.3 released.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
>> Bruce
>> --
>> perl -e 'print
>> unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
>> );'
>>
>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
>> Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Hiram Chirino <ch...@gmail.com>.
David, I fully agree. Unless it actually passes a vote, any tag in SVN is
just 'temporary'. The source tar balls are really what we need to be
reviewing anyways.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 3:28 AM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>wrote:
> I went to some trouble a while back to set up the build to be more up to
> date and use the latest release technology but I don't seem to have updated
> the instructions. It looks to me as if the release candidate is technically
> fine from the artifacts generated. As noted below, I'm strongly -1 on
> releasing things labelled RC1 etc. Since Dejan has just gone through the
> process he's probably best qualified to write accurate instructions but I
> can have a go if people would prefer.
>
> On Sep 17, 2009, at 5:23 PM, Bruce Snyder wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Hiram Chirino <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It's been deployed to a staging repo. See my earlier reply about that in
>>> this thread.
>>>
>>
>> Then we should probably vote on and release that module separately and
>> before the full ActiveMQ release. The ActiveMQ release candidates
>> shouldn't make use of candidate modules located in temporary repos.
>>
>
> I don't see the point of this rule as long as the vote using the
> not-yet-released artifact mentions that it depends on the
> not-yet-released-artifact's vote. We do this all the time in geronimo.
>
>
>> Also, why has there been no discussion regarding the preparation for
>>>> this release on the dev list?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Isn't that what what's going on now?
>>>
>>> IMHO rolling release candidates is the best way to get folks engaged and
>>> discussing the current state of the product and whats still missing.
>>>
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>> As we have long seen in the History of ActiveMQ releases.. it typically
>>> takes several release candidates before everyone's happy. I guess this
>>> first release candidate was no different!
>>>
>>
>>
> My idea of a release candidate is a bunch of artifacts in a nexus staging
> repo that we vote on. If the vote passes, we promote them, if the vote
> fails we drop them and remove the tag they were built from. As such the
> stuff in the repo and tag needs to be what we want to release, including
> correct release version numbers.
>
> Agreed, release candidates are the best way to seek consensus for a
>> release. To improve upon the way we go about handling releases, I'd
>> like to suggest a couple minor changes:
>>
>> * Since tags are supposed to be a snapshot in time and therefore
>> shouldn't change, I'd like to suggest that the tag name be changed to
>> reflect the fact that it's a release candidate, e.g.,
>> activemq-5.3.0-RC1, etc. Either that or we could instead work from a
>> branch that can change as much as necessary until there's agreement on
>> which candidate to release.
>>
>
> I don't understand what you are suggesting here. Has someone proposed
> changing the tag created by the release plugin?
>
>
>> * I'd also like to suggest that tarballs and zips for each release
>> candidate be labeled as such, e.g.,
>> apache-activemq-5.3.0-RC1-bin.tar.gz,
>> apache-activemq-5.3.0-RC2-bin.tar.gz, etc. This way there is no
>> confusion and downloaded items are clearly marked as a release
>> candidate and not a full 5.3 release.
>>
>
> Unless you plan to publish these RCx as real releases after voting on them,
> IMO this is a terrible idea. After we find something that's acceptable we
> would have to remove the tag we just decided was OK and re-release with a
> new name.
>
>
>> Also, while we're discussing releases, we should make sure that the
>> release guide reflects the latest practices:
>>
>> http://activemq.apache.org/release-guide.html
>>
>> I see that it needs to be updated to include the process for release
>> candidates.
>>
>> That's why I'm grateful to anyone who take the initiative to start
>>> rolling
>>> the release candidates. They are basically taking on a tough job and
>>> prodding the rest of to get involved the release!
>>>
>>
> Releasing is amazingly time consuming, even with the latest greatest maven
> tooling. I wouldn't have minded an email saying "I'm gonna push a release
> candidate tomorrow" but this release has been on deck for months now.... I'm
> not complaining now that there's some action.
>
>
>
>>> We really do need to start doing releases more often.
>>>
>>
>> +1 to releasing more often. We should probably aim for more frequent
>> minor releases, i.e., 5.2.1, 5.2.2, etc. so fixes are delivered
>> faster.
>>
>
> Wishing for more releases is great, but its hard to believe the amount of
> time it takes to prepare a release candidate. I'll be really happy to see
> 5.3 released.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
>> Bruce
>> --
>> perl -e 'print
>> unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
>> );'
>>
>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
>> Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
>>
>
>
--
Regards,
Hiram
Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com/
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Bruce Snyder <br...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Hiram Chirino <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's been deployed to a staging repo. See my earlier reply about that in
> this thread.
Then we should probably vote on and release that module separately and
before the full ActiveMQ release. The ActiveMQ release candidates
shouldn't make use of candidate modules located in temporary repos.
>> Also, why has there been no discussion regarding the preparation for
>> this release on the dev list?
>>
>>
> Isn't that what what's going on now?
>
> IMHO rolling release candidates is the best way to get folks engaged and
> discussing the current state of the product and whats still missing.
Agreed.
> As we have long seen in the History of ActiveMQ releases.. it typically
> takes several release candidates before everyone's happy. I guess this
> first release candidate was no different!
Agreed, release candidates are the best way to seek consensus for a
release. To improve upon the way we go about handling releases, I'd
like to suggest a couple minor changes:
* Since tags are supposed to be a snapshot in time and therefore
shouldn't change, I'd like to suggest that the tag name be changed to
reflect the fact that it's a release candidate, e.g.,
activemq-5.3.0-RC1, etc. Either that or we could instead work from a
branch that can change as much as necessary until there's agreement on
which candidate to release.
* I'd also like to suggest that tarballs and zips for each release
candidate be labeled as such, e.g.,
apache-activemq-5.3.0-RC1-bin.tar.gz,
apache-activemq-5.3.0-RC2-bin.tar.gz, etc. This way there is no
confusion and downloaded items are clearly marked as a release
candidate and not a full 5.3 release.
Also, while we're discussing releases, we should make sure that the
release guide reflects the latest practices:
http://activemq.apache.org/release-guide.html
I see that it needs to be updated to include the process for release
candidates.
> That's why I'm grateful to anyone who take the initiative to start rolling
> the release candidates. They are basically taking on a tough job and
> prodding the rest of to get involved the release!
>
> We really do need to start doing releases more often.
+1 to releasing more often. We should probably aim for more frequent
minor releases, i.e., 5.2.1, 5.2.2, etc. so fixes are delivered
faster.
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Hiram Chirino <ch...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Bruce Snyder <br...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net>
> wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > I've cut a release candidate for 5.3.0
> >
> > Could you review the release artifacts and vote?
> >
> > The release notes are here:
> >
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/ActiveMQ+5.3.0+Release
> >
> > You can get the binary distributions here:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.3.0/
> >
> > The Maven2 repository is at:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/
> >
> > The Maven generated website for this version will be created first thing
> > tomorrow
> >
> > Source SVN tag:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/activemq/tags/activemq-5.3.0
> >
> > Please vote to approve this release binary
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0
> > [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
>
> I'm seeing the following failure when building the source from the
> activemq-5.3.0 tag:
>
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [ERROR] BUILD ERROR
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Failed to resolve artifact.
>
> GroupId: org.apache.activemq.protobuf
> ArtifactId: activemq-protobuf
> Version: 1.0
>
> Reason: Unable to download the artifact from any repository
>
> org.apache.activemq.protobuf:activemq-protobuf:pom:1.0
>
> from the specified remote repositories:
> nexus-public-snapshots
> (http://localhost:8081/nexus/content/groups/public-snapshots),
> nexus (http://localhost:8081/nexus/content/groups/public)
>
>
>
It's been deployed to a staging repo. See my earlier reply about that in
this thread.
> Also, why has there been no discussion regarding the preparation for
> this release on the dev list?
>
>
Isn't that what what's going on now?
IMHO rolling release candidates is the best way to get folks engaged and
discussing the current state of the product and whats still missing.
As we have long seen in the History of ActiveMQ releases.. it typically
takes several release candidates before everyone's happy. I guess this
first release candidate was no different!
That's why I'm grateful to anyone who take the initiative to start rolling
the release candidates. They are basically taking on a tough job and
prodding the rest of to get involved the release!
We really do need to start doing releases more often.
> Bruce
> --
> perl -e 'print
> unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
> );'
>
> ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
> Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
>
--
Regards,
Hiram
Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com/
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Bruce Snyder <br...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I've cut a release candidate for 5.3.0
>
> Could you review the release artifacts and vote?
>
> The release notes are here:
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/ActiveMQ+5.3.0+Release
>
> You can get the binary distributions here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.3.0/
>
> The Maven2 repository is at:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/
>
> The Maven generated website for this version will be created first thing
> tomorrow
>
> Source SVN tag:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/activemq/tags/activemq-5.3.0
>
> Please vote to approve this release binary
>
> [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
I'm seeing the following failure when building the source from the
activemq-5.3.0 tag:
[INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ERROR] BUILD ERROR
[INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] Failed to resolve artifact.
GroupId: org.apache.activemq.protobuf
ArtifactId: activemq-protobuf
Version: 1.0
Reason: Unable to download the artifact from any repository
org.apache.activemq.protobuf:activemq-protobuf:pom:1.0
from the specified remote repositories:
nexus-public-snapshots
(http://localhost:8081/nexus/content/groups/public-snapshots),
nexus (http://localhost:8081/nexus/content/groups/public)
Also, why has there been no discussion regarding the preparation for
this release on the dev list?
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net>.
On the same time AcitveMQ Protocol Buffers Java Implementation 1.0 release
candidate is cut as well. It is needed for ActiveMQ 5.3.0 release.
You can find artifacts here
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-026/
and svn tag here
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/activemq/activemq-protobuf/tags/activemq-protobuf-pom-1.0/
Please vote to approve this release binary as well
[ ] +1 Release the binary as AcitveMQ Protocol Buffers Java Implementation
1.0
[ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
Here's my +1
Cheers
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 8:56 PM, Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I've cut a release candidate for 5.3.0
>
> Could you review the release artifacts and vote?
>
> The release notes are here:
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/ActiveMQ+5.3.0+Release
>
> You can get the binary distributions here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.3.0/
>
> The Maven2 repository is at:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/
>
> The Maven generated website for this version will be created first thing
> tomorrow
>
> Source SVN tag:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/activemq/tags/activemq-5.3.0
>
> Please vote to approve this release binary
>
> [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
>
> Here's my +1
>
> Cheers
> --
> Dejan Bosanac
>
> Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
> ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
> Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
>
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
I've had a look at activemq osgi stuff, and there's much more work
that I initially thought.
I don't want to delay the release too much, so i think we should go
without that, and i'll try to take some time in the coming weeks to
have a clean OSGi story.
My initial goal was to be able to support multiple versions of
activemq deployed in the same container, but the plugin discovery
mechanism is not really osgi friendly and there are still lots of
modules that are not available as osgi bundles.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 21:48, Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net> wrote:
> Sure Guillaume,
>
> please just merge your changes to 5.3 branch and I'll cut the new candidate.
>
> Cheers
> --
> Dejan Bosanac
>
> Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
> ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
> Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I would have liked to fix the OSGi metadata before the release. I was
>> planning to do that early tomorrow...
>>
>> On Thursday, September 17, 2009, Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Everyone,
>> >
>> > I've cut a release candidate for 5.3.0
>> >
>> > Could you review the release artifacts and vote?
>> >
>> > The release notes are here:
>> >
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/ActiveMQ+5.3.0+Release
>> >
>> > You can get the binary distributions here:
>> >
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.3.0/
>> >
>> > The Maven2 repository is at:
>> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/
>> >
>> > The Maven generated website for this version will be created first thing
>> > tomorrow
>> >
>> > Source SVN tag:
>> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/activemq/tags/activemq-5.3.0
>> >
>> > Please vote to approve this release binary
>> >
>> > [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0
>> > [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
>> >
>> > Here's my +1
>> >
>> > Cheers
>> > --
>> > Dejan Bosanac
>> >
>> > Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
>> > ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
>> > Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net>.
Sure Guillaume,
please just merge your changes to 5.3 branch and I'll cut the new candidate.
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would have liked to fix the OSGi metadata before the release. I was
> planning to do that early tomorrow...
>
> On Thursday, September 17, 2009, Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net>
> wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > I've cut a release candidate for 5.3.0
> >
> > Could you review the release artifacts and vote?
> >
> > The release notes are here:
> >
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/ActiveMQ+5.3.0+Release
> >
> > You can get the binary distributions here:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.3.0/
> >
> > The Maven2 repository is at:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/
> >
> > The Maven generated website for this version will be created first thing
> > tomorrow
> >
> > Source SVN tag:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/activemq/tags/activemq-5.3.0
> >
> > Please vote to approve this release binary
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0
> > [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
> >
> > Here's my +1
> >
> > Cheers
> > --
> > Dejan Bosanac
> >
> > Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
> > ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
> > Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
> >
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.3.0
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
I would have liked to fix the OSGi metadata before the release. I was
planning to do that early tomorrow...
On Thursday, September 17, 2009, Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I've cut a release candidate for 5.3.0
>
> Could you review the release artifacts and vote?
>
> The release notes are here:
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/ActiveMQ+5.3.0+Release
>
> You can get the binary distributions here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.3.0/
>
> The Maven2 repository is at:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/activemq-staging-030/
>
> The Maven generated website for this version will be created first thing
> tomorrow
>
> Source SVN tag:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/activemq/tags/activemq-5.3.0
>
> Please vote to approve this release binary
>
> [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
>
> Here's my +1
>
> Cheers
> --
> Dejan Bosanac
>
> Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
> ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
> Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com