You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@usergrid.apache.org by Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com> on 2014/06/18 04:00:43 UTC
[DISCUSS] Usergrid release structure
Usergridsters,
This thread is to get the discussion ball rolling w/ respect to the structure of our release artifact.
I propose that we release as follows:
1. We only release one artifact (compressed archive - tar ball, zip, etc). We previously discussed releasing everything (stack, sdks, portal) separately, but after further discussions with many of you, the consensus is that a single artifact would be more streamlined and user friendly.
2. The artifact will have a directory structure as follows:
WebApps
- built portal code, in war file to be served off of Tomcat
- stack war file
- ideally, users can simply deploy what is in this directory to Tomcat
Lib
- sample usergrid props file
Launcher
- Jar file for launcher in separate dir
Docs
- docs describing how to get up and running w/ Usergrid
SDKs
- each SDK will be in its own subdirectory
UGC
- can’t forget our awesome command line utility
- should this include the UGC code? Or just a readme file telling how to install (it is a Ruby Gem)? Or should we simply reference UGC in the Docs?
Please weigh in.
Rod
--
Rod Simpson
@rockerston
rodsimpson.com
Re: [DISCUSS] Usergrid release structure
Posted by Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com>.
Usergriders,
Lets keep this release train a' rolling!
Who can step up and finish off these tickets:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-4
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-3
I think they are either very close or done.
I have taken USERGRID-100
Thanks!
--
Rod Simpson
@rockerston
rodsimpson.com
On July 1, 2014 at 6:41:38 PM, Rod Simpson (rod@rodsimpson.com) wrote:
Usergriders,
Below is the checklist (http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list) for doing a release. I reordered it so it makes procedural sense. My notes are inline:
1. Top-level LICENSE and NOTICE are correct for each distribution.
2. All source files have license headers where appropriate
-1 and 2 are almost done. We have 3 tickets open (parent issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-122):
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-100
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-4
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-3
Anyone want to step up and take these?
3. The provenance of all source files is clear (ASF or software grants).
- can anyone confirm if this is done?
4. Dependencies licenses are ok as per http://apache.org/legal/
- This may be completed (think we did it even before we got into the incubator), but then USERGRID-100 seems to contradict this
5. Release consists of source code only, no binaries.
- uh, ok. So it sounds like we should just release the source tree as-is since there are no binaries there.
- can we provide supplementary “ease of use”, but "not official release” binaries? If so, are we allowed to host them / link to them on the Usergrid website?
6. Build is successful including automated tests.
- I assume we need to fork Master to an RC branch?
- Anything else we need to do here?
7. Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-189
8. DISCLAIMER is correct, filenames include "incubating".
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-190
--
Rod Simpson
@rockerston
rodsimpson.com
On June 19, 2014 at 7:37:24 AM, Jake Farrell (jfarrell@apache.org) wrote:
Hey Rod
This is not an easy process to navigate, I recommend reading through the previous links as well as [1] and would also recommend that the process be scripted into two parts
A. Create source RC packaging, signing and draft vote email creation
B. RC to release and vote result draft email creation
here is a sample I recently created [2] that might give you some ideas (scripts: release-candidate, changelog, release)
-Jake
[1]: http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
[2]: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-aurora.git;a=tree;f=build-support/release;h=6ee94dfd09ae07ccb5049b978f350ef5f974b9e2;hb=HEAD
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com> wrote:
Jake, thanks for supplying these links. This is my first time going through this, so I appreciate the assistance.
--
Rod Simpson
@rockerston
rodsimpson.com
On June 17, 2014 at 8:27:04 PM, Jake Farrell (jfarrell@apache.org) wrote:
Rod
If you are going to take on the release management please make sure you are
familiar with [1] and [2] and all policies around the License and Notice
files. Also the above artifacts you have outlined are not able to be apart
of the source release (war, jar, gem) as they are binary files.
-Jake
[1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
[2]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com> wrote:
> Usergridsters,
>
> This thread is to get the discussion ball rolling w/ respect to the
> structure of our release artifact.
>
> I propose that we release as follows:
>
> 1. We only release one artifact (compressed archive - tar ball, zip, etc).
> We previously discussed releasing everything (stack, sdks, portal)
> separately, but after further discussions with many of you, the consensus
> is that a single artifact would be more streamlined and user friendly.
>
> 2. The artifact will have a directory structure as follows:
>
> WebApps
> - built portal code, in war file to be served off of Tomcat
> - stack war file
> - ideally, users can simply deploy what is in this directory to Tomcat
> Lib
> - sample usergrid props file
> Launcher
> - Jar file for launcher in separate dir
> Docs
> - docs describing how to get up and running w/ Usergrid
> SDKs
> - each SDK will be in its own subdirectory
> UGC
> - can’t forget our awesome command line utility
> - should this include the UGC code? Or just a readme file telling how
> to install (it is a Ruby Gem)? Or should we simply reference UGC in the
> Docs?
>
>
> Please weigh in.
>
> Rod
>
>
> --
> Rod Simpson
> @rockerston
> rodsimpson.com
Re: [DISCUSS] Usergrid release structure
Posted by Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com>.
Usergriders,
Below is the checklist (http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list) for doing a release. I reordered it so it makes procedural sense. My notes are inline:
1. Top-level LICENSE and NOTICE are correct for each distribution.
2. All source files have license headers where appropriate
-1 and 2 are almost done. We have 3 tickets open (parent issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-122):
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-100
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-4
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-3
Anyone want to step up and take these?
3. The provenance of all source files is clear (ASF or software grants).
- can anyone confirm if this is done?
4. Dependencies licenses are ok as per http://apache.org/legal/
- This may be completed (think we did it even before we got into the incubator), but then USERGRID-100 seems to contradict this
5. Release consists of source code only, no binaries.
- uh, ok. So it sounds like we should just release the source tree as-is since there are no binaries there.
- can we provide supplementary “ease of use”, but "not official release” binaries? If so, are we allowed to host them / link to them on the Usergrid website?
6. Build is successful including automated tests.
- I assume we need to fork Master to an RC branch?
- Anything else we need to do here?
7. Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-189
8. DISCLAIMER is correct, filenames include "incubating".
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/USERGRID-190
--
Rod Simpson
@rockerston
rodsimpson.com
On June 19, 2014 at 7:37:24 AM, Jake Farrell (jfarrell@apache.org) wrote:
Hey Rod
This is not an easy process to navigate, I recommend reading through the previous links as well as [1] and would also recommend that the process be scripted into two parts
A. Create source RC packaging, signing and draft vote email creation
B. RC to release and vote result draft email creation
here is a sample I recently created [2] that might give you some ideas (scripts: release-candidate, changelog, release)
-Jake
[1]: http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
[2]: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-aurora.git;a=tree;f=build-support/release;h=6ee94dfd09ae07ccb5049b978f350ef5f974b9e2;hb=HEAD
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com> wrote:
Jake, thanks for supplying these links. This is my first time going through this, so I appreciate the assistance.
--
Rod Simpson
@rockerston
rodsimpson.com
On June 17, 2014 at 8:27:04 PM, Jake Farrell (jfarrell@apache.org) wrote:
Rod
If you are going to take on the release management please make sure you are
familiar with [1] and [2] and all policies around the License and Notice
files. Also the above artifacts you have outlined are not able to be apart
of the source release (war, jar, gem) as they are binary files.
-Jake
[1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
[2]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com> wrote:
> Usergridsters,
>
> This thread is to get the discussion ball rolling w/ respect to the
> structure of our release artifact.
>
> I propose that we release as follows:
>
> 1. We only release one artifact (compressed archive - tar ball, zip, etc).
> We previously discussed releasing everything (stack, sdks, portal)
> separately, but after further discussions with many of you, the consensus
> is that a single artifact would be more streamlined and user friendly.
>
> 2. The artifact will have a directory structure as follows:
>
> WebApps
> - built portal code, in war file to be served off of Tomcat
> - stack war file
> - ideally, users can simply deploy what is in this directory to Tomcat
> Lib
> - sample usergrid props file
> Launcher
> - Jar file for launcher in separate dir
> Docs
> - docs describing how to get up and running w/ Usergrid
> SDKs
> - each SDK will be in its own subdirectory
> UGC
> - can’t forget our awesome command line utility
> - should this include the UGC code? Or just a readme file telling how
> to install (it is a Ruby Gem)? Or should we simply reference UGC in the
> Docs?
>
>
> Please weigh in.
>
> Rod
>
>
> --
> Rod Simpson
> @rockerston
> rodsimpson.com
Re: [DISCUSS] Usergrid release structure
Posted by Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>.
Hey Rod
This is not an easy process to navigate, I recommend reading through the
previous links as well as [1] and would also recommend that the process be
scripted into two parts
A. Create source RC packaging, signing and draft vote email creation
B. RC to release and vote result draft email creation
here is a sample I recently created [2] that might give you some ideas
(scripts: release-candidate, changelog, release)
-Jake
[1]: http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
[2]:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-aurora.git;a=tree;f=build-support/release;h=6ee94dfd09ae07ccb5049b978f350ef5f974b9e2;hb=HEAD
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com> wrote:
> Jake, thanks for supplying these links. This is my first time going
> through this, so I appreciate the assistance.
>
>
> --
> Rod Simpson
> @rockerston <https://twitter.com/rockerston>
> rodsimpson.com
>
> On June 17, 2014 at 8:27:04 PM, Jake Farrell (jfarrell@apache.org) wrote:
>
> Rod
> If you are going to take on the release management please make sure you
> are
> familiar with [1] and [2] and all policies around the License and Notice
> files. Also the above artifacts you have outlined are not able to be apart
> of the source release (war, jar, gem) as they are binary files.
>
> -Jake
>
> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
> [2]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com> wrote:
>
> > Usergridsters,
> >
> > This thread is to get the discussion ball rolling w/ respect to the
> > structure of our release artifact.
> >
> > I propose that we release as follows:
> >
> > 1. We only release one artifact (compressed archive - tar ball, zip,
> etc).
> > We previously discussed releasing everything (stack, sdks, portal)
> > separately, but after further discussions with many of you, the
> consensus
> > is that a single artifact would be more streamlined and user friendly.
> >
> > 2. The artifact will have a directory structure as follows:
> >
> > WebApps
> > - built portal code, in war file to be served off of Tomcat
> > - stack war file
> > - ideally, users can simply deploy what is in this directory to Tomcat
> > Lib
> > - sample usergrid props file
> > Launcher
> > - Jar file for launcher in separate dir
> > Docs
> > - docs describing how to get up and running w/ Usergrid
> > SDKs
> > - each SDK will be in its own subdirectory
> > UGC
> > - can’t forget our awesome command line utility
> > - should this include the UGC code? Or just a readme file telling how
> > to install (it is a Ruby Gem)? Or should we simply reference UGC in the
> > Docs?
> >
> >
> > Please weigh in.
> >
> > Rod
> >
> >
> > --
> > Rod Simpson
> > @rockerston
> > rodsimpson.com
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Usergrid release structure
Posted by Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com>.
Jake, thanks for supplying these links. This is my first time going through this, so I appreciate the assistance.
--
Rod Simpson
@rockerston
rodsimpson.com
On June 17, 2014 at 8:27:04 PM, Jake Farrell (jfarrell@apache.org) wrote:
Rod
If you are going to take on the release management please make sure you are
familiar with [1] and [2] and all policies around the License and Notice
files. Also the above artifacts you have outlined are not able to be apart
of the source release (war, jar, gem) as they are binary files.
-Jake
[1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
[2]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com> wrote:
> Usergridsters,
>
> This thread is to get the discussion ball rolling w/ respect to the
> structure of our release artifact.
>
> I propose that we release as follows:
>
> 1. We only release one artifact (compressed archive - tar ball, zip, etc).
> We previously discussed releasing everything (stack, sdks, portal)
> separately, but after further discussions with many of you, the consensus
> is that a single artifact would be more streamlined and user friendly.
>
> 2. The artifact will have a directory structure as follows:
>
> WebApps
> - built portal code, in war file to be served off of Tomcat
> - stack war file
> - ideally, users can simply deploy what is in this directory to Tomcat
> Lib
> - sample usergrid props file
> Launcher
> - Jar file for launcher in separate dir
> Docs
> - docs describing how to get up and running w/ Usergrid
> SDKs
> - each SDK will be in its own subdirectory
> UGC
> - can’t forget our awesome command line utility
> - should this include the UGC code? Or just a readme file telling how
> to install (it is a Ruby Gem)? Or should we simply reference UGC in the
> Docs?
>
>
> Please weigh in.
>
> Rod
>
>
> --
> Rod Simpson
> @rockerston
> rodsimpson.com
Re: [DISCUSS] Usergrid release structure
Posted by Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>.
Rod
If you are going to take on the release management please make sure you are
familiar with [1] and [2] and all policies around the License and Notice
files. Also the above artifacts you have outlined are not able to be apart
of the source release (war, jar, gem) as they are binary files.
-Jake
[1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
[2]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Rod Simpson <ro...@rodsimpson.com> wrote:
> Usergridsters,
>
> This thread is to get the discussion ball rolling w/ respect to the
> structure of our release artifact.
>
> I propose that we release as follows:
>
> 1. We only release one artifact (compressed archive - tar ball, zip, etc).
> We previously discussed releasing everything (stack, sdks, portal)
> separately, but after further discussions with many of you, the consensus
> is that a single artifact would be more streamlined and user friendly.
>
> 2. The artifact will have a directory structure as follows:
>
> WebApps
> - built portal code, in war file to be served off of Tomcat
> - stack war file
> - ideally, users can simply deploy what is in this directory to Tomcat
> Lib
> - sample usergrid props file
> Launcher
> - Jar file for launcher in separate dir
> Docs
> - docs describing how to get up and running w/ Usergrid
> SDKs
> - each SDK will be in its own subdirectory
> UGC
> - can’t forget our awesome command line utility
> - should this include the UGC code? Or just a readme file telling how
> to install (it is a Ruby Gem)? Or should we simply reference UGC in the
> Docs?
>
>
> Please weigh in.
>
> Rod
>
>
> --
> Rod Simpson
> @rockerston
> rodsimpson.com