Re: Preparing for our first release

[Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>]

How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.

The staging repository is at
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
The Maven site/documentation is at
http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
final location for the site.

Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
out? There's a sample template at
http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
package changes people should actually test the binaries before
voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.

Kalle


On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>
> Kalle
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>
>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>
>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>
>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Les
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>]

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for clarifying Craig.
> Is it common for this artifact to be auto-created during the build
> process?  Or do people simply do an SVN checkout and create a .zip
> manually?

Absolutely it's common. I think the whole remote-resources plugin was
created for that purpose.

> Kalle, what do you guys do on Tapestry and/or Tynamo?

Tapestry follows the standard Apache/Maven release process and at
Tynamo, we are lucky enough to do whatever we want :) Replying
out-of-order now, but Brian is right - except that we cannot drop the
-incubating from the version - it's dictated by the incubator rules
(there was an earlier thread on that).

Kalle


> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell
> <cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
>> Hi Les,
>>
>> Official release artifacts are the sources to the shiro project. The maven
>> artifacts are considered optional binary releases.
>>
>> The contents of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shiro/trunk/ which
>> contains the LICENSE and NOTICE should be tar/zipped and optionally jarred.
>> Then each of the tar/jar files should be checksummed and signed with a
>> signing key using pgp, making sure the signing key is in the KEYS file.
>>
>> You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can evaluate them,
>> like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g.
>> people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>
>>> Awesome!
>>>
>>> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
>>> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
>>> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
>>> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
>>> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
>>>
>>> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
>>> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
>>> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
>>> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
>>> ASF practice.
>>>
>>> - Les
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
>>>>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in a
>>>>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the
>>>>>>>> rollback!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
>>>>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can
>>>>>>>>>> add
>>>>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
>>>>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I
>>>>>>>>>>> optimistically
>>>>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's
>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong
>>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be
>>>>>>>>>>> easy to
>>>>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>>>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always
>>>>>>>>>>>> returning
>>>>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and
>>>>>>>>>>>> re-try?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Props
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote
>>>>>>>>>>>>> email
>>>>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last
>>>>>>>>>>>>> minute
>>>>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>>>>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or won't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're long
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a crack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concretely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finish all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> Craig L Russell
>> Architect, Oracle
>> http://db.apache.org/jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Brian Demers <br...@gmail.com>]

Found it, its in the ASF parent:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/pom/tags/apache-7/pom.xml

So it should just work.  The LICENSE, NOTICE, etc, are packed in the
META-INF, in the sources bundle (per module):
https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/archive/org/apache/shiro/shiro-core/1.0.0-incubating/shiro-core-1.0.0-incubating-sources.jar/!/META-INF/LICENSE

NOTE: the shiro-all, sources doesn't have any source, it just contains the
LICENSE, etc

On a side note, can we get the "incubating" dropped from the version?   This
might confuse people, as Shiro well deserves a clean 1.0.0 stamp!


On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Brian Demers <br...@gmail.com>wrote:

>
> There were changes not to long ago so that maven would bundle an ASF
> friendly bundle (as maven itself has the same requirements)
> I'll see if i can dig it up.
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Gavin Hogan <GH...@commercehub.com>wrote:
>
>> Hey Les
>>
>> I thought maven does this pretty well via assembly -
>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-assembly-plugin/
>>
>> Have never had reason to use this, just thought I would point it out.
>>
>> Good luck with the release....
>>
>> Gavin
>>
>>
>>
>> From:
>> Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>> To:
>> shiro-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Date:
>> 05/20/2010 09:20 PM
>> Subject:
>> [SPAM] - Re: Preparing for our first release - Bayesian Filter detected
>> spam
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for clarifying Craig.
>>
>> Is it common for this artifact to be auto-created during the build
>> process?  Or do people simply do an SVN checkout and create a .zip
>> manually?
>>
>> Kalle, what do you guys do on Tapestry and/or Tynamo?
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell
>> <cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
>> > Hi Les,
>> >
>> > Official release artifacts are the sources to the shiro project. The
>> maven
>> > artifacts are considered optional binary releases.
>> >
>> > The contents of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shiro/trunk/
>> which
>> > contains the LICENSE and NOTICE should be tar/zipped and optionally
>> jarred.
>> > Then each of the tar/jar files should be checksummed and signed with a
>> > signing key using pgp, making sure the signing key is in the KEYS file.
>> >
>> > You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can evaluate
>> them,
>> > like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g.
>> > people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001.
>> >
>> > Craig
>> >
>> > On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>> >
>> >> Awesome!
>> >>
>> >> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
>> >> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
>> >> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
>> >> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
>> >> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
>> >>
>> >> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
>> >> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
>> >> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
>> >> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
>> >> ASF practice.
>> >>
>> >> - Les
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>> >> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
>> >>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
>> >>>
>> >>> Kalle
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org
>> >
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
>> >>>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood
>> <lh...@apache.org>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in
>> a
>> >>>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>> >>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Kalle
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <les@hazlewood.com
>> >
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the
>> >>>>>>> rollback!
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>> >>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood
>> >>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the
>> rollback
>> >>>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can
>> >>>>>>>>> add
>> >>>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it
>> in
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x
>> branch
>> >>>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Kalle
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>> >>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I
>> >>>>>>>>>> optimistically
>> >>>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly
>> it's
>> >>>>>>>>>> an
>> >>>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong
>> >>>>>>>>>> points
>> >>>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be
>> >>>>>>>>>> easy to
>> >>>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>> >>>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood
>> >>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always
>> >>>>>>>>>>> returning
>> >>>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and
>> >>>>>>>>>>> re-try?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>> >>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess
>> I've
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the
>> way.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Props
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating.
>> This
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> is the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official
>> vote
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> email
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Since
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit
>> more
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> minute
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries
>> before
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the
>> incremental
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> versions for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after
>> releasing
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.0,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.x
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes etc.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want
>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> or won't
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> branch and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're long
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to
>> take
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a crack
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues
>> that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up if
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> concretely
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible from
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> finish all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, I'll
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >
>> > Craig L Russell
>> > Architect, Oracle
>> > http://db.apache.org/jdo
>> > 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
>> > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Brian Demers <br...@gmail.com>]

There were changes not to long ago so that maven would bundle an ASF
friendly bundle (as maven itself has the same requirements)
I'll see if i can dig it up.


On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Gavin Hogan <GH...@commercehub.com> wrote:

> Hey Les
>
> I thought maven does this pretty well via assembly -
> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-assembly-plugin/
>
> Have never had reason to use this, just thought I would point it out.
>
> Good luck with the release....
>
> Gavin
>
>
>
> From:
> Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
> To:
> shiro-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Date:
> 05/20/2010 09:20 PM
> Subject:
> [SPAM] - Re: Preparing for our first release - Bayesian Filter detected
> spam
>
>
>
> Thanks for clarifying Craig.
>
> Is it common for this artifact to be auto-created during the build
> process?  Or do people simply do an SVN checkout and create a .zip
> manually?
>
> Kalle, what do you guys do on Tapestry and/or Tynamo?
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell
> <cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
> > Hi Les,
> >
> > Official release artifacts are the sources to the shiro project. The
> maven
> > artifacts are considered optional binary releases.
> >
> > The contents of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shiro/trunk/
> which
> > contains the LICENSE and NOTICE should be tar/zipped and optionally
> jarred.
> > Then each of the tar/jar files should be checksummed and signed with a
> > signing key using pgp, making sure the signing key is in the KEYS file.
> >
> > You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can evaluate
> them,
> > like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g.
> > people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
> >
> >> Awesome!
> >>
> >> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
> >> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
> >> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
> >> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
> >> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
> >>
> >> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
> >> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
> >> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
> >> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
> >> ASF practice.
> >>
> >> - Les
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> >> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
> >>>
> >>> Kalle
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
> >>>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood
> <lh...@apache.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in
> a
> >>>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> >>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Kalle
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the
> >>>>>>> rollback!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> >>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood
> >>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the
> rollback
> >>>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can
> >>>>>>>>> add
> >>>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it
> in
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x
> branch
> >>>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Kalle
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
> >>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I
> >>>>>>>>>> optimistically
> >>>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly
> it's
> >>>>>>>>>> an
> >>>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong
> >>>>>>>>>> points
> >>>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be
> >>>>>>>>>> easy to
> >>>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
> >>>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Kalle
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood
> >>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always
> >>>>>>>>>>> returning
> >>>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and
> >>>>>>>>>>> re-try?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
> >>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess
> I've
> >>>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the
> way.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Props
> >>>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating.
> This
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official
> vote
> >>>>>>>>>>>> email
> >>>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Since
> >>>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit
> more
> >>>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last
> >>>>>>>>>>>> minute
> >>>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries
> before
> >>>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the
> incremental
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> version
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> versions for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after
> releasing
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.x
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes etc.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want
> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> or won't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> branch and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're long
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to
> take
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a crack
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues
> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up if
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> concretely
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible from
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> finish all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, I'll
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
> > Craig L Russell
> > Architect, Oracle
> > http://db.apache.org/jdo
> > 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
> > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Gavin Hogan <GH...@commercehub.com>]

Hey Les

I thought maven does this pretty well via assembly - 
http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-assembly-plugin/

Have never had reason to use this, just thought I would point it out.

Good luck with the release....

Gavin



From:
Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
To:
shiro-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date:
05/20/2010 09:20 PM
Subject:
[SPAM] - Re: Preparing for our first release - Bayesian Filter detected 
spam



Thanks for clarifying Craig.

Is it common for this artifact to be auto-created during the build
process?  Or do people simply do an SVN checkout and create a .zip
manually?

Kalle, what do you guys do on Tapestry and/or Tynamo?

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell
<cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
> Hi Les,
>
> Official release artifacts are the sources to the shiro project. The 
maven
> artifacts are considered optional binary releases.
>
> The contents of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shiro/trunk/ 
which
> contains the LICENSE and NOTICE should be tar/zipped and optionally 
jarred.
> Then each of the tar/jar files should be checksummed and signed with a
> signing key using pgp, making sure the signing key is in the KEYS file.
>
> You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can evaluate 
them,
> like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g.
> people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001.
>
> Craig
>
> On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>
>> Awesome!
>>
>> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
>> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
>> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
>> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
>> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
>>
>> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
>> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
>> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
>> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
>> ASF practice.
>>
>> - Les
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
>>>
>>> Kalle
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
>>>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood 
<lh...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in 
a
>>>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the
>>>>>>> rollback!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the 
rollback
>>>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can
>>>>>>>>> add
>>>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it 
in
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x 
branch
>>>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I
>>>>>>>>>> optimistically
>>>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly 
it's
>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong
>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be
>>>>>>>>>> easy to
>>>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always
>>>>>>>>>>> returning
>>>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and
>>>>>>>>>>> re-try?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess 
I've
>>>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the 
way.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Props
>>>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. 
This
>>>>>>>>>>>> is the
>>>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official 
vote
>>>>>>>>>>>> email
>>>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Since
>>>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit 
more
>>>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last
>>>>>>>>>>>> minute
>>>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries 
before
>>>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the 
incremental
>>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor
>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after 
releasing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want 
to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or won't
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x
>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're long
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to 
take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a crack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues 
that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concretely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finish all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Oracle
> http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>]

Thanks for clarifying Craig.

Is it common for this artifact to be auto-created during the build
process?  Or do people simply do an SVN checkout and create a .zip
manually?

Kalle, what do you guys do on Tapestry and/or Tynamo?

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell
<cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
> Hi Les,
>
> Official release artifacts are the sources to the shiro project. The maven
> artifacts are considered optional binary releases.
>
> The contents of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shiro/trunk/ which
> contains the LICENSE and NOTICE should be tar/zipped and optionally jarred.
> Then each of the tar/jar files should be checksummed and signed with a
> signing key using pgp, making sure the signing key is in the KEYS file.
>
> You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can evaluate them,
> like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g.
> people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001.
>
> Craig
>
> On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>
>> Awesome!
>>
>> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
>> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
>> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
>> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
>> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
>>
>> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
>> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
>> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
>> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
>> ASF practice.
>>
>> - Les
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
>>>
>>> Kalle
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
>>>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in a
>>>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the
>>>>>>> rollback!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
>>>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can
>>>>>>>>> add
>>>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
>>>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I
>>>>>>>>>> optimistically
>>>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's
>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong
>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be
>>>>>>>>>> easy to
>>>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always
>>>>>>>>>>> returning
>>>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and
>>>>>>>>>>> re-try?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>>>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Props
>>>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This
>>>>>>>>>>>> is the
>>>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote
>>>>>>>>>>>> email
>>>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Since
>>>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last
>>>>>>>>>>>> minute
>>>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>>>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental
>>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor
>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or won't
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x
>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're long
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a crack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concretely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finish all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Oracle
> http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>]

Ah

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:51 PM, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 21/05/2010, at 4:43 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>
>> Mentors,
>>
>> Is there anything with an exact step-by-step guide for walking through
>> the release steps for maven-based projects?  Something like this:
>>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToRelease
>>
>> (but for Maven projects).  The Incubator Release guide is more
>> philosophical than practical: I'm looking for a 'do x, then y, then z'
>> with command line snippets to automate as much as possible.  Does
>> anyone know of anything like this?  It'd be much easier to 'just do
>> it' than try to interpret the Incubator guide.
>
> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html
>
> It's not exhaustive on the requirements - I think it gets you as far as Kalle already has.
>
> As long as the source bundles were produced, then that should be fine. I think that's https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/org/apache/shiro/shiro-root/1.0.0-incubating/

Ah yes - it's late and I'm tired :/  My apologies for being dense -
thanks for opening my eyes :)

> However, I tend to agree with Craig that you should lay them out in a format like you would eventually copy into www.apache.org/dist/ as well so that it's clear.
>
> I didn't see a binary release (something for non-maven users) - is that just the shiro-all JAR?

I believe that is the intention at the moment.  We can make a little
more robust binary package for later releases, I'm sure.  I think
we're just trying to make it through this one first :)

Thanks for the pointers!

Les

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>]

I even tried to integrate the Maven rat plugin, 0.6, but I couldn't
get it to work because the excludes (for readmes) didn't seem to take
effect -  but nevertheless, it didn't report much issues.

Kalle


On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 7:18 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <ad...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>
> On May 21, 2010, at 6:50 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>>
>> On May 21, 2010, at 5:59 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>>
>>> On May 20, 2010, at 11:51 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 21/05/2010, at 4:43 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mentors,
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there anything with an exact step-by-step guide for walking through
>>>>> the release steps for maven-based projects?  Something like this:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToRelease
>>>>>
>>>>> (but for Maven projects).  The Incubator Release guide is more
>>>>> philosophical than practical: I'm looking for a 'do x, then y, then z'
>>>>> with command line snippets to automate as much as possible.  Does
>>>>> anyone know of anything like this?  It'd be much easier to 'just do
>>>>> it' than try to interpret the Incubator guide.
>>>>
>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html
>>>
>>> This page doesn't mention how to create the www.apache.org/dist/ bundles,, i.e. http://www.apache.org/dist/maven/source/
>>>
>>> What we will need as the source distribution will go into http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/shiro
>>>
>>> So I think we're very close, but do need to make sure that the release artifacts that are voted end up both in the maven repository (binary distribution) and dist/incubator/shiro (source distribution).
>>>
>>> Great progress.
>>
>> Has someone run rat on this dist?
>
> Just did.  Looks good.
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

["Alan D. Cabrera" <ad...@toolazydogs.com>]

On May 21, 2010, at 6:50 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:

> 
> On May 21, 2010, at 5:59 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
> 
>> On May 20, 2010, at 11:51 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>> 
>>> On 21/05/2010, at 4:43 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Mentors,
>>>> 
>>>> Is there anything with an exact step-by-step guide for walking through
>>>> the release steps for maven-based projects?  Something like this:
>>>> 
>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToRelease
>>>> 
>>>> (but for Maven projects).  The Incubator Release guide is more
>>>> philosophical than practical: I'm looking for a 'do x, then y, then z'
>>>> with command line snippets to automate as much as possible.  Does
>>>> anyone know of anything like this?  It'd be much easier to 'just do
>>>> it' than try to interpret the Incubator guide.
>>> 
>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html
>> 
>> This page doesn't mention how to create the www.apache.org/dist/ bundles,, i.e. http://www.apache.org/dist/maven/source/
>> 
>> What we will need as the source distribution will go into http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/shiro
>> 
>> So I think we're very close, but do need to make sure that the release artifacts that are voted end up both in the maven repository (binary distribution) and dist/incubator/shiro (source distribution).
>> 
>> Great progress.
> 
> Has someone run rat on this dist?

Just did.  Looks good.


Regards,
Alan

Re: Preparing for our first release

["Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>]

On May 21, 2010, at 5:59 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:

> On May 20, 2010, at 11:51 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
> 
>> On 21/05/2010, at 4:43 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>> 
>>> Mentors,
>>> 
>>> Is there anything with an exact step-by-step guide for walking through
>>> the release steps for maven-based projects?  Something like this:
>>> 
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToRelease
>>> 
>>> (but for Maven projects).  The Incubator Release guide is more
>>> philosophical than practical: I'm looking for a 'do x, then y, then z'
>>> with command line snippets to automate as much as possible.  Does
>>> anyone know of anything like this?  It'd be much easier to 'just do
>>> it' than try to interpret the Incubator guide.
>> 
>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html
> 
> This page doesn't mention how to create the www.apache.org/dist/ bundles,, i.e. http://www.apache.org/dist/maven/source/
> 
> What we will need as the source distribution will go into http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/shiro
> 
> So I think we're very close, but do need to make sure that the release artifacts that are voted end up both in the maven repository (binary distribution) and dist/incubator/shiro (source distribution).
> 
> Great progress.

Has someone run rat on this dist?


Regards,
Alan

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>]

On May 20, 2010, at 11:51 PM, Brett Porter wrote:

> On 21/05/2010, at 4:43 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>
>> Mentors,
>>
>> Is there anything with an exact step-by-step guide for walking  
>> through
>> the release steps for maven-based projects?  Something like this:
>>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToRelease
>>
>> (but for Maven projects).  The Incubator Release guide is more
>> philosophical than practical: I'm looking for a 'do x, then y, then  
>> z'
>> with command line snippets to automate as much as possible.  Does
>> anyone know of anything like this?  It'd be much easier to 'just do
>> it' than try to interpret the Incubator guide.
>
> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html

This page doesn't mention how to create the www.apache.org/dist/  
bundles,, i.e. http://www.apache.org/dist/maven/source/

What we will need as the source distribution will go into http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/shiro

So I think we're very close, but do need to make sure that the release  
artifacts that are voted end up both in the maven repository (binary  
distribution) and dist/incubator/shiro (source distribution).

Great progress.

Craig

>
> It's not exhaustive on the requirements - I think it gets you as far  
> as Kalle already has.
>
> As long as the source bundles were produced, then that should be  
> fine. I think that's https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/org/apache/shiro/shiro-root/1.0.0-incubating/
>
> However, I tend to agree with Craig that you should lay them out in  
> a format like you would eventually copy into www.apache.org/dist/ as  
> well so that it's clear.
>
> I didn't see a binary release (something for non-maven users) - is  
> that just the shiro-all JAR?
>
> Cheers,
> Brett
>
> --
> Brett Porter
> brett@apache.org
> http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
>

Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>]

On 21/05/2010, at 4:43 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:

> Mentors,
> 
> Is there anything with an exact step-by-step guide for walking through
> the release steps for maven-based projects?  Something like this:
> 
> http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToRelease
> 
> (but for Maven projects).  The Incubator Release guide is more
> philosophical than practical: I'm looking for a 'do x, then y, then z'
> with command line snippets to automate as much as possible.  Does
> anyone know of anything like this?  It'd be much easier to 'just do
> it' than try to interpret the Incubator guide.

http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html

It's not exhaustive on the requirements - I think it gets you as far as Kalle already has.

As long as the source bundles were produced, then that should be fine. I think that's https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/org/apache/shiro/shiro-root/1.0.0-incubating/

However, I tend to agree with Craig that you should lay them out in a format like you would eventually copy into www.apache.org/dist/ as well so that it's clear.

I didn't see a binary release (something for non-maven users) - is that just the shiro-all JAR?

Cheers,
Brett

--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://brettporter.wordpress.com/

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>]

Mentors,

Is there anything with an exact step-by-step guide for walking through
the release steps for maven-based projects?  Something like this:

http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToRelease

(but for Maven projects).  The Incubator Release guide is more
philosophical than practical: I'm looking for a 'do x, then y, then z'
with command line snippets to automate as much as possible.  Does
anyone know of anything like this?  It'd be much easier to 'just do
it' than try to interpret the Incubator guide.

- Les

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Craig L Russell
<cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> On May 20, 2010, at 7:32 PM, Kalle Korhonen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell
>> <cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can evaluate
>>> them,
>>> like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g.
>>> people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001.
>>
>> That's exactly what the staging repository is for.
>
> Except that I didn't see anything in the staging repo that looks like a
> gzip/jar with checksums and signatures. Maybe you can point it out to me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Craig
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>>> On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>>
>>>> Awesome!
>>>>
>>>> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
>>>> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
>>>> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
>>>> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
>>>> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
>>>>
>>>> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
>>>> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
>>>> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
>>>> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
>>>> ASF practice.
>>>>
>>>> - Les
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
>>>>>
>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
>>>>>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in a
>>>>>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the
>>>>>>>>> rollback!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the
>>>>>>>>>>> rollback
>>>>>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can
>>>>>>>>>>> add
>>>>>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x
>>>>>>>>>> branch
>>>>>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I
>>>>>>>>>>>> optimistically
>>>>>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly
>>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong
>>>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be
>>>>>>>>>>>> easy to
>>>>>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>>>>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always
>>>>>>>>>>>>> returning
>>>>>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> re-try?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Props
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vote
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> email
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minute
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releasing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or won't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're long
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a crack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concretely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finish all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Craig L Russell
>>> Architect, Oracle
>>> http://db.apache.org/jdo
>>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
>>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>>
>>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Oracle
> http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>]

Hi Crag,

I wasn't thinking it would be part of the maven repo directly, but it
is nicely packaged up there:

https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/org/apache/shiro/shiro-root/1.0.0-incubating/

You'll see the .zip and its signatures and checksums.

Cheers,

Les

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Craig L Russell
<cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> On May 20, 2010, at 7:32 PM, Kalle Korhonen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell
>> <cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can evaluate
>>> them,
>>> like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g.
>>> people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001.
>>
>> That's exactly what the staging repository is for.
>
> Except that I didn't see anything in the staging repo that looks like a
> gzip/jar with checksums and signatures. Maybe you can point it out to me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Craig
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>>> On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>>
>>>> Awesome!
>>>>
>>>> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
>>>> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
>>>> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
>>>> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
>>>> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
>>>>
>>>> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
>>>> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
>>>> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
>>>> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
>>>> ASF practice.
>>>>
>>>> - Les
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
>>>>>
>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
>>>>>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in a
>>>>>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the
>>>>>>>>> rollback!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the
>>>>>>>>>>> rollback
>>>>>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can
>>>>>>>>>>> add
>>>>>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x
>>>>>>>>>> branch
>>>>>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I
>>>>>>>>>>>> optimistically
>>>>>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly
>>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong
>>>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be
>>>>>>>>>>>> easy to
>>>>>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>>>>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always
>>>>>>>>>>>>> returning
>>>>>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> re-try?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Props
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vote
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> email
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minute
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releasing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or won't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're long
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a crack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concretely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finish all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Craig L Russell
>>> Architect, Oracle
>>> http://db.apache.org/jdo
>>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
>>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>>
>>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Oracle
> http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>]

On May 20, 2010, at 7:32 PM, Kalle Korhonen wrote:

> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell
> <cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
>> You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can  
>> evaluate them,
>> like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g.
>> people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001.
>
> That's exactly what the staging repository is for.

Except that I didn't see anything in the staging repo that looks like  
a gzip/jar with checksums and signatures. Maybe you can point it out  
to me.

Thanks,

Craig
>
> Kalle
>
>
>> On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>
>>> Awesome!
>>>
>>> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
>>> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
>>> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
>>> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.   
>>> What
>>> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
>>>
>>> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
>>> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
>>> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
>>> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
>>> ASF practice.
>>>
>>> - Les
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org 
>>>> >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
>>>>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org 
>>>>> >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll  
>>>>>> commit in a
>>>>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <les@hazlewood.com 
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for  
>>>>>>>> doing the
>>>>>>>> rollback!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the  
>>>>>>>>>> rollback
>>>>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming  
>>>>>>>>>> I can
>>>>>>>>>> add
>>>>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix  
>>>>>>>>> it in
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro- 
>>>>>>>>> root-0.0.x branch
>>>>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I
>>>>>>>>>>> optimistically
>>>>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is.  
>>>>>>>>>>> Undoubtedly it's
>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong
>>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it?  
>>>>>>>>>>> Should be
>>>>>>>>>>> easy to
>>>>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to  
>>>>>>>>>>> rollback the
>>>>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always
>>>>>>>>>>>> returning
>>>>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and
>>>>>>>>>>>> re-try?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try.  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guess I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the way.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Props
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0- 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> incubating. This
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> official vote
>>>>>>>>>>>>> email
>>>>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bit more
>>>>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> last
>>>>>>>>>>>>> minute
>>>>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maven
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html) 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> incremental
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releasing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development,  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or won't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.1x
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're long
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a crack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opportunity to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concretely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finish all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> Craig L Russell
>> Architect, Oracle
>> http://db.apache.org/jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>
>>

Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>]

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Craig L Russell
<cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
> You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can evaluate them,
> like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g.
> people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001.

That's exactly what the staging repository is for.

Kalle


> On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>
>> Awesome!
>>
>> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
>> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
>> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
>> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
>> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
>>
>> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
>> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
>> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
>> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
>> ASF practice.
>>
>> - Les
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
>>>
>>> Kalle
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
>>>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in a
>>>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the
>>>>>>> rollback!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
>>>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can
>>>>>>>>> add
>>>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
>>>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I
>>>>>>>>>> optimistically
>>>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's
>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong
>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be
>>>>>>>>>> easy to
>>>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always
>>>>>>>>>>> returning
>>>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and
>>>>>>>>>>> re-try?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>>>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Props
>>>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This
>>>>>>>>>>>> is the
>>>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote
>>>>>>>>>>>> email
>>>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Since
>>>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last
>>>>>>>>>>>> minute
>>>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>>>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental
>>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor
>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or won't
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x
>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're long
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a crack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concretely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finish all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Oracle
> http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>]

Hi Les,

Official release artifacts are the sources to the shiro project. The  
maven artifacts are considered optional binary releases.

The contents of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shiro/trunk/  
which contains the LICENSE and NOTICE should be tar/zipped and  
optionally jarred. Then each of the tar/jar files should be  
checksummed and signed with a signing key using pgp, making sure the  
signing key is in the KEYS file.

You should put the release artifacts somewhere that folks can evaluate  
them, like in a user directory on people visible via the web, e.g.  
people.apache.org/~kaosko/shiro-001.

Craig

On May 20, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:

> Awesome!
>
> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
>
> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
> ASF practice.
>
> - Les
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ 
>> orgapacheshiro-004/
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood  
>> <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
>>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org 
>>> > wrote:
>>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit  
>>>> in a
>>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood  
>>>>> <le...@hazlewood.com> wrote:
>>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing  
>>>>>> the rollback!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org 
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the  
>>>>>>>> rollback
>>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I  
>>>>>>>> can add
>>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix  
>>>>>>> it in the
>>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x  
>>>>>>> branch
>>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I  
>>>>>>>>> optimistically
>>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is.  
>>>>>>>>> Undoubtedly it's an
>>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong  
>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should  
>>>>>>>>> be easy to
>>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback  
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org 
>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always  
>>>>>>>>>> returning
>>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and  
>>>>>>>>>> re-try?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess  
>>>>>>>>>>> I've
>>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along  
>>>>>>>>>>> the way. Props
>>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating.  
>>>>>>>>>>> This is the
>>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official  
>>>>>>>>>>> vote email
>>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html 
>>>>>>>>>>> . Since
>>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit  
>>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some  
>>>>>>>>>>> last minute
>>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries  
>>>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72  
>>>>>>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current  
>>>>>>>>>>>> Maven
>>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html) 
>>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the  
>>>>>>>>>>>> incremental version
>>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor  
>>>>>>>>>>>> versions for
>>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after  
>>>>>>>>>>>> releasing 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and  
>>>>>>>>>>>> create 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development,  
>>>>>>>>>>>> bug fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't  
>>>>>>>>>>>> want to or won't
>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a  
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.1x branch and
>>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org 
>>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we're long
>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> take a crack
>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that,  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> but I missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> should concretely
>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible from
>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can finish all
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this,  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Tauren Mills <ta...@tauren.com>]

It looks like the maven artifacts to support the recent changes made
to the documentation (adding targetFilterLifecycle parameter to
DelegatingFilterProxy) have not been updated:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SHIRO/Spring

The latest snapshot available in the repository I'm using is 172, and
doesn't work if I make this change to my spring config (I get an
IllegalArgumentException):
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/shiro/shiro-core/1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT/

I've been waiting for a new snapshot to appear, but it hasn't yet and
it's been several hours. Is this because snapshots are now going to
here instead?
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/

I guess I'm just wanting to know what repository I should be using, or
if that is still in flux.

Thanks,
Tauren



On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Awesome!
>
> But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
> artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
> instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
> jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
> is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?
>
> As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
> README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
> source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
> these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
> ASF practice.
>
> - Les
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
> >
> > Kalle
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
> >> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in a
> >>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> >>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
> >>>>
> >>>> Kalle
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com> wrote:
> >>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the rollback!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> >>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
> >>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add
> >>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in the
> >>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
> >>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Kalle
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
> >>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically
> >>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an
> >>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points
> >>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to
> >>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
> >>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Kalle
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
> >>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
> >>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
> >>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
> >>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
> >>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
> >>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
> >>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
> >>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
> >>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
> >>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
> >>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
> >>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
> >>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
> >>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Kalle
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
> >>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
> >>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
> >>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
> >>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
> >>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
> >>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
> >>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
> >>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
> >>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
> >>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
> >>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
> >>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
> >>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
> >>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
> >>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
> >>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Les
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>]

Awesome!

But I just thought of a question:  what is/are our official release
artifact(s)?  Most people would expect a .zip so they can download
instead of being forced to use Maven, right?  We used to have a
jsecurity .zip and a jsecurity-with-dependencies.zip previously.  What
is good practice here in the ASF/Incubator?

As I understand it, we need to distribute things like the LICENSE,
README, NOTICE files and other things as well - not just the .jar/
source .jar/JavaDoc .jars, right?  Our build doesn't currently make
these things, so I'm just trying to understand what is conventional
ASF practice.

- Les

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/
>
> Kalle
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
>> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in a
>>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com> wrote:
>>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the rollback!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
>>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add
>>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in the
>>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
>>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically
>>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an
>>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points
>>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to
>>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
>>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
>>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
>>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
>>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
>>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
>>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
>>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
>>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
>>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
>>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>]

Here's the new 1.0.0-incubating staging url:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-004/

Kalle


On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
> Tossing the ball back in to your court...
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in a
>> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>>
>>> Kalle
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com> wrote:
>>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the rollback!
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
>>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add
>>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in the
>>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
>>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically
>>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an
>>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points
>>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to
>>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
>>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
>>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
>>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
>>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
>>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
>>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
>>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
>>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
>>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
>>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>]

Ok, Kalle - issue has been committed to both trunk and the branch.
Tossing the ball back in to your court...

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in a
> minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com> wrote:
>>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the rollback!
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
>>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add
>>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in the
>>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
>>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically
>>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an
>>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points
>>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to
>>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
>>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
>>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
>>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
>>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
>>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
>>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
>>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
>>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
>>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
>>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
>>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
>>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>]

I'm running the new unit test now - fix looks good.  I'll commit in a
minute and re-post when I've merged into the branch.

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.
>
> Kalle
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com> wrote:
>> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the rollback!
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
>>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add
>>>> the fix to trunk?
>>>
>>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in the
>>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
>>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>>
>>> Kalle
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically
>>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an
>>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points
>>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to
>>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>>
>>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
>>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
>>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
>>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
>>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
>>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
>>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
>>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
>>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
>>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
>>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
>>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
>>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
>>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>]

Pushed the cart back to the top of the hill.

Kalle


On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com> wrote:
> No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the rollback!
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
>>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add
>>> the fix to trunk?
>>
>> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in the
>> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
>> (hey you asked for it :)
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically
>>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an
>>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points
>>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to
>>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>>
>>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
>>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
>>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
>>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
>>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
>>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
>>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
>>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
>>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
>>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
>>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
>>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
>>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
>>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Les Hazlewood <le...@hazlewood.com>]

No worries - merging is uber easy in Idea ;)  Thanks for doing the rollback!

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen
<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add
>> the fix to trunk?
>
> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in the
> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
> (hey you asked for it :)
>
> Kalle
>
>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically
>>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an
>>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points
>>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to
>>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>>
>>> Kalle
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>>
>>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
>>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
>>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>>
>>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
>>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>>
>>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
>>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
>>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
>>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
>>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
>>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
>>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
>>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
>>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
>>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
>>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

["Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>]

On May 20, 2010, at 12:06 PM, Kalle Korhonen wrote:

> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
>> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add
>> the fix to trunk?
> 
> Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in the
> trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
> (hey you asked for it :)

FYI, since you just you two guys fiddling around with things at the moment, it's ok to trash the branch and tags.

But you are correct, normally you would merge the fix into the branch and trunk.


Regards,
Alan

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>]

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
> while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add
> the fix to trunk?

Yeah, I'll rollback and drop the staged release. You can fix it in the
trunk, but the fix needs to be merged to the shiro-root-0.0.x branch
(hey you asked for it :)

Kalle


> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically
>> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an
>> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points
>> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to
>> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
>> release now that we've tested the process works.
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>>
>>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
>>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
>>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>>
>>>> The staging repository is at
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
>>>> final location for the site.
>>>>
>>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
>>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
>>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
>>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
>>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
>>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
>>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
>>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
>>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
>>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
>>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>>
>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>]

Yeah, I can fix it rather quickly I think.  Can you do the rollback
while I fix it and write the test case? Also, I'm assuming I can add
the fix to trunk?

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Kalle Korhonen
<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically
> thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an
> issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points
> for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to
> create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
> release now that we've tested the process works.
>
> Kalle
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>>
>> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
>> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
>>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>>
>>> The staging repository is at
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
>>> final location for the site.
>>>
>>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
>>> out? There's a sample template at
>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
>>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
>>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>>
>>> Kalle
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
>>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
>>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
>>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
>>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
>>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
>>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
>>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Les
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>]

Noticed, but didn't really read through until now and I optimistically
thought it was more esoteric than it seems it is. Undoubtedly it's an
issue with native sessions only but that's one of the strong points
for Shiro. I assume you are already looking into it? Should be easy to
create a test case for it. It's a simple matter to rollback the
release now that we've tested the process works.

Kalle


On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167
>
> httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
> null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>
>> The staging repository is at
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
>> final location for the site.
>>
>> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
>> out? There's a sample template at
>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
>> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
>> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
>> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
>> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
>>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
>>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
>>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
>>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
>>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
>>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
>>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>>
>>> Kalle
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>>
>>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>>>
>>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>>
>>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Les
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>]

Sure, I'd love to!  But did you see this?

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-167

httpServletRequest.getSession().getServletContext() always returning
null doesn't sound great.  Shouldn't we fix it quickly and re-try?

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen
<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>
> The staging repository is at
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
> The Maven site/documentation is at
> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
> final location for the site.
>
> Les, would you like to do the honors and send the official vote email
> out? There's a sample template at
> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. Since
> it's our first release though maybe you want to add a bit more
> description and maybe mention that since there were some last minute
> package changes people should actually test the binaries before
> voting, perhaps extend the voting time from minimum 72 hours.
>
> Kalle
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Kalle Korhonen
> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On that note, I think we should release 1.0.0. Current Maven
>> versioning scheme works "best" with x.x.x numbering (see
>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/versions-maven-plugin/version-rules.html).
>> It'd also would make sensible to then reserve the incremental version
>> (the last component) for bug fixes and allow using minor versions for
>> new (compatible) feature releases. In essence, after releasing 1.0.0,
>> we'd prepare the trunk for development of 1.1.0 and create 1.0.x
>> branch for bug fixes and continue feature development, bug fixes etc.
>> in the trunk until we identify a feature set we don't want to or won't
>> make it to the next release, at which time we'd pull a 1.1x branch and
>> update the trunk for development of 1.2.x (or even 2.0.x).
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I think most people in the Shiro community would agree that we're long
>>> overdue for our first release ;)
>>>
>>> So, to that end, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to take a crack
>>> at tagging only what I feel are the most important issues that
>>> absolutely must be in to 1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd like to
>>> post to this list again to allow people the opportunity to speak-up if
>>> they see something that they think should be included but I missed.
>>>
>>> I'm doing this to help us get a little focus on what should concretely
>>> define our first release, and to get it out as soon as possible from
>>> now.  Just my opinion, but I think it'd be great if we can finish all
>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually release) by 1 January.
>>>
>>> Please let me know if anyone does not agree with this, otherwise, I'll
>>> get started as soon as possible organizing the existing issues.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Les
>>>
>>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

["Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>]

On May 21, 2010, at 7:32 AM, Kalle Korhonen wrote:

> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>> On May 20, 2010, at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen wrote:
>> Looked at http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating/team-list.html.
>> It should contain all the committers on the team.  Can we update this?
> 
> Committers need to modify Shiro's root pom and add their info.

Fair enough.  Let's put out an announcement so that developers know that they need to do this.


Regards,
Alan

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>]

On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
> On May 20, 2010, at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen wrote:
> Looked at http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating/team-list.html.
> It should contain all the committers on the team.  Can we update this?

Committers need to modify Shiro's root pom and add their info.

Kalle

Re: Preparing for our first release

[Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>]

Yeah, I just added that as a placeholder for when we 'got around to
it'.  In retrospect, I think I should remove it in the interim and
rely on the root POM listing developers to minimize the delay in
getting all things updated.  Is this ok?

On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>
> On May 20, 2010, at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen wrote:
>
>> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
>> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
>> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
>>
>> The staging repository is at
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
>> The Maven site/documentation is at
>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
>> final location for the site.
>
> Looked at http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating/team-list.html.
>
> It should contain all the committers on the team.  Can we update this?
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>

Re: Preparing for our first release

["Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>]

On May 20, 2010, at 10:53 AM, Kalle Korhonen wrote:

> How about that, the release worked on the first try. Guess I've
> learned a thing or two about releasing with Maven along the way. Props
> to Maven folks for super clear yet concise instructions.
> 
> The staging repository is at
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-002/
> The Maven site/documentation is at
> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating. This is the
> final location for the site.

Looked at http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating/team-list.html.

It should contain all the committers on the team.  Can we update this?


Regards,
Alan