You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tuscany.apache.org by "Simon Nash (JIRA)" <tu...@ws.apache.org> on 2006/11/28 00:09:21 UTC
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-949) Incorrect set of extensions published
to the maven repo
Incorrect set of extensions published to the maven repo
-------------------------------------------------------
Key: TUSCANY-949
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949
Project: Tuscany
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Build System
Affects Versions: Java-M2
Environment: all
Reporter: Simon Nash
mvn deploy publishes a number of extensions to the maven repo that should not be published there because they are not fully tested and endorsed parts of the Tuscany M2 release. Specifically, the following jars should not be published:
groovy-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
databinding-castor-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
databinding-jaxb-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
databinding-xmlbeans-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
databinding-test-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
celtix-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
binding-jsonrpc-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
An option should be provided on the build to selectively publish only those extensions that have been endorsed as part of the Tuscany M2 release.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-949) Incorrect set of extensions published to the maven repo
Posted by Venkata Krishnan <fo...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
If we admit what Simon has found in the first place is indeed an
inconsistency then I believe we must rectify that and if this patch goes
well that way then it should be committed. Furthermore, I guess Simon's
gone and spent some valuable time over this patch on our invitation to do
that. So I think its unfair and discouraging to turn it down now. Well
that's what I feel from my heart.
- Venkat
On 12/1/06, Rick <cr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I feel that M2 should have been (is) in lock down and fixes should only be
> to
> issues that clearly break functionality. However, we the community SHOULD
> have
> stuck to that position. Given we gave the go ahead to this and two people
> have
> claimed to have tested it and it addresses the issue stated I think we
> should
> accept it.
>
> ant elder wrote:
> > On 11/29/06, Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Nov 29, 2006, at 4:00 AM, ant elder wrote:
> >> > Looks like that answers all the questions and sounds convincing to
> >> > me. We
> >> > discussed doing this the other day and agreed it needed doing and
> >> > based on
> >> > that Simon went ahead and did the work for it, so I think we should
> >> > go ahead
> >> > and apply this to M2 now. Unless there are any other concerns I'll
> >> > do this
> >> > tonight.
> >>
> >> We didn't agree it needed doing. I still don't think it does as I see
> >> no downside to not making this change.
> >>
> >> I have concerns that using profiles this way will cause problems
> >> (e.g. what happens if two profiles include different modules) and I
> >> was hoping Simon had a better solution. I think this approach is
> >> confusing for users as it's not obvious which modules get built and
> >> which don't.
> >>
> >> I am also concerned that there has not been enough testing given we
> >> are so close to release.
> >>
> >> I'm not concerned enough though to veto such a change so if you think
> >> it's the right thing to do then go ahead. I would suggest waiting to
> >> see what the consensus really is.
> >> --
> >> Jeremy
> >
> >
> > I'm reluctant to commit this while you're so against it, but I'm not
> sure I
> > understand your concerns.
> >
> > We did clearly tell Simon to go and make a patch to do this:
> >
> > "<jboynes> simonnash: if you want something different, please give us a
> > patch for the build to build it as YOU want it"
> >
> > and:
> >
> > <simonnash> so in building the release I would expect to select a subset
> of
> > all available modules and copy those selected modules into contrib and
> also
> > deploy htem to maven
> > <jboynes> patches welcome
> > <simonnash> ok i will do what I can. any help from others will be
> > appreciated.
> >
> > and then the IRC chat summary posted to the dev list clearly said it was
> > happening:
> >
> > "there was some discussion around what Tuscany jars are released as part
> of
> > M2 into the maven repository. Currently everything in the Tuscany build
> is
> > released, should that be trimmed to only those things that we want to
> say
> > are ready? Simon is going to create a patch to the build to make this
> > possible."
> >
> > No one questioned that and in good faith he's gone off and made a patch
> as
> > requested.
> >
> > With the current Axiom issue we have a bit of time now, I've tried the
> > patch
> > and seems to work fine, would you give it a test? What other testing
> would
> > you like to see?
> >
> > Another thing I think we should remember is that this patch is from a
> new
> > contributor so we should be receptive so as to encourage further
> > participation.
> >
> > I'd really appreciate others comments on if we should apply this.
> >
> > ...ant
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
>
Re: [jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-949) Incorrect set of extensions published
to the maven repo
Posted by Rick <cr...@gmail.com>.
I feel that M2 should have been (is) in lock down and fixes should only be to
issues that clearly break functionality. However, we the community SHOULD have
stuck to that position. Given we gave the go ahead to this and two people have
claimed to have tested it and it addresses the issue stated I think we should
accept it.
ant elder wrote:
> On 11/29/06, Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 29, 2006, at 4:00 AM, ant elder wrote:
>> > Looks like that answers all the questions and sounds convincing to
>> > me. We
>> > discussed doing this the other day and agreed it needed doing and
>> > based on
>> > that Simon went ahead and did the work for it, so I think we should
>> > go ahead
>> > and apply this to M2 now. Unless there are any other concerns I'll
>> > do this
>> > tonight.
>>
>> We didn't agree it needed doing. I still don't think it does as I see
>> no downside to not making this change.
>>
>> I have concerns that using profiles this way will cause problems
>> (e.g. what happens if two profiles include different modules) and I
>> was hoping Simon had a better solution. I think this approach is
>> confusing for users as it's not obvious which modules get built and
>> which don't.
>>
>> I am also concerned that there has not been enough testing given we
>> are so close to release.
>>
>> I'm not concerned enough though to veto such a change so if you think
>> it's the right thing to do then go ahead. I would suggest waiting to
>> see what the consensus really is.
>> --
>> Jeremy
>
>
> I'm reluctant to commit this while you're so against it, but I'm not sure I
> understand your concerns.
>
> We did clearly tell Simon to go and make a patch to do this:
>
> "<jboynes> simonnash: if you want something different, please give us a
> patch for the build to build it as YOU want it"
>
> and:
>
> <simonnash> so in building the release I would expect to select a subset of
> all available modules and copy those selected modules into contrib and also
> deploy htem to maven
> <jboynes> patches welcome
> <simonnash> ok i will do what I can. any help from others will be
> appreciated.
>
> and then the IRC chat summary posted to the dev list clearly said it was
> happening:
>
> "there was some discussion around what Tuscany jars are released as part of
> M2 into the maven repository. Currently everything in the Tuscany build is
> released, should that be trimmed to only those things that we want to say
> are ready? Simon is going to create a patch to the build to make this
> possible."
>
> No one questioned that and in good faith he's gone off and made a patch as
> requested.
>
> With the current Axiom issue we have a bit of time now, I've tried the
> patch
> and seems to work fine, would you give it a test? What other testing would
> you like to see?
>
> Another thing I think we should remember is that this patch is from a new
> contributor so we should be receptive so as to encourage further
> participation.
>
> I'd really appreciate others comments on if we should apply this.
>
> ...ant
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-949) Incorrect set of extensions published to the maven repo
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On 11/29/06, Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Nov 29, 2006, at 4:00 AM, ant elder wrote:
> > Looks like that answers all the questions and sounds convincing to
> > me. We
> > discussed doing this the other day and agreed it needed doing and
> > based on
> > that Simon went ahead and did the work for it, so I think we should
> > go ahead
> > and apply this to M2 now. Unless there are any other concerns I'll
> > do this
> > tonight.
>
> We didn't agree it needed doing. I still don't think it does as I see
> no downside to not making this change.
>
> I have concerns that using profiles this way will cause problems
> (e.g. what happens if two profiles include different modules) and I
> was hoping Simon had a better solution. I think this approach is
> confusing for users as it's not obvious which modules get built and
> which don't.
>
> I am also concerned that there has not been enough testing given we
> are so close to release.
>
> I'm not concerned enough though to veto such a change so if you think
> it's the right thing to do then go ahead. I would suggest waiting to
> see what the consensus really is.
> --
> Jeremy
I'm reluctant to commit this while you're so against it, but I'm not sure I
understand your concerns.
We did clearly tell Simon to go and make a patch to do this:
"<jboynes> simonnash: if you want something different, please give us a
patch for the build to build it as YOU want it"
and:
<simonnash> so in building the release I would expect to select a subset of
all available modules and copy those selected modules into contrib and also
deploy htem to maven
<jboynes> patches welcome
<simonnash> ok i will do what I can. any help from others will be
appreciated.
and then the IRC chat summary posted to the dev list clearly said it was
happening:
"there was some discussion around what Tuscany jars are released as part of
M2 into the maven repository. Currently everything in the Tuscany build is
released, should that be trimmed to only those things that we want to say
are ready? Simon is going to create a patch to the build to make this
possible."
No one questioned that and in good faith he's gone off and made a patch as
requested.
With the current Axiom issue we have a bit of time now, I've tried the patch
and seems to work fine, would you give it a test? What other testing would
you like to see?
Another thing I think we should remember is that this patch is from a new
contributor so we should be receptive so as to encourage further
participation.
I'd really appreciate others comments on if we should apply this.
...ant
Re: [jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-949) Incorrect set of extensions published to the maven repo
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
On Nov 29, 2006, at 4:00 AM, ant elder wrote:
> Looks like that answers all the questions and sounds convincing to
> me. We
> discussed doing this the other day and agreed it needed doing and
> based on
> that Simon went ahead and did the work for it, so I think we should
> go ahead
> and apply this to M2 now. Unless there are any other concerns I'll
> do this
> tonight.
We didn't agree it needed doing. I still don't think it does as I see
no downside to not making this change.
I have concerns that using profiles this way will cause problems
(e.g. what happens if two profiles include different modules) and I
was hoping Simon had a better solution. I think this approach is
confusing for users as it's not obvious which modules get built and
which don't.
I am also concerned that there has not been enough testing given we
are so close to release.
I'm not concerned enough though to veto such a change so if you think
it's the right thing to do then go ahead. I would suggest waiting to
see what the consensus really is.
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-949) Incorrect set of extensions published to the maven repo
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On 11/28/06, Simon Nash <na...@hursley.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> I'm responding to Jeremy's comments here rather than in TUSCANY-949
> because I believe it's considered good practice to have discussions
> on the mailing list rather than in updates to JIRAs.
>
> Jeremy Boynes (JIRA) wrote:
>
> > [
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949?page=comments#action_12454069]
> >
> > Jeremy Boynes commented on TUSCANY-949:
> > ---------------------------------------
> >
> > I don't think we should use profiles in this way. We already use
> profiles
> > (e.g. in SDO) to determine the type of content that gets built (e.g. in
> SDO
> > we use them to generate aggregated vs. non-aggregated javadoc, in SCA we
> > have a sourcecheck profile that enables checkstyle and pmd) but this is
> > using them to determine which modules get built. I don't think this
> allows
> > us to do something like run sourcecheck on the release modules for
> example.
> >
> The -P option of mvn can have multiple comma-separated values, so there's
> no problem with specifying -Psourcecheck,release to sourcecheck the
> release modules.
>
> > This is really just trying to get modularity without doing the
> modularity
> > work. It would be better to do that by restructuring the build into an
> > appropriately modular tree.
> >
> This patch is fixing the problem of publishing M2 artifacts that should
> not be published to maven, as discussed on yesterday's IRC chat. It does
> not prevent us from doing a build tree restructure for better modularity.
> If at some future time this code becomes redundant because of the
> restructured tree, it can easily be removed.
Looks like that answers all the questions and sounds convincing to me. We
discussed doing this the other day and agreed it needed doing and based on
that Simon went ahead and did the work for it, so I think we should go ahead
and apply this to M2 now. Unless there are any other concerns I'll do this
tonight.
...ant
Re: [jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-949) Incorrect set of extensions published
to the maven repo
Posted by Simon Nash <na...@hursley.ibm.com>.
I'm responding to Jeremy's comments here rather than in TUSCANY-949
because I believe it's considered good practice to have discussions
on the mailing list rather than in updates to JIRAs.
Jeremy Boynes (JIRA) wrote:
> [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949?page=comments#action_12454069 ]
>
> Jeremy Boynes commented on TUSCANY-949:
> ---------------------------------------
>
> I don't think we should use profiles in this way. We already use profiles
> (e.g. in SDO) to determine the type of content that gets built (e.g. in SDO
> we use them to generate aggregated vs. non-aggregated javadoc, in SCA we
> have a sourcecheck profile that enables checkstyle and pmd) but this is
> using them to determine which modules get built. I don't think this allows
> us to do something like run sourcecheck on the release modules for example.
>
The -P option of mvn can have multiple comma-separated values, so there's
no problem with specifying -Psourcecheck,release to sourcecheck the
release modules.
> This is really just trying to get modularity without doing the modularity
> work. It would be better to do that by restructuring the build into an
> appropriately modular tree.
>
This patch is fixing the problem of publishing M2 artifacts that should
not be published to maven, as discussed on yesterday's IRC chat. It does
not prevent us from doing a build tree restructure for better modularity.
If at some future time this code becomes redundant because of the
restructured tree, it can easily be removed.
>
>
>>Incorrect set of extensions published to the maven repo
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Key: TUSCANY-949
>> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949
>> Project: Tuscany
>> Issue Type: Bug
>> Components: Build System
>> Affects Versions: Java-M2
>> Environment: all
>> Reporter: Simon Nash
>> Attachments: jira949.diff
>>
>>
>>mvn deploy publishes a number of extensions to the maven repo that should not be published there because they are not fully tested and endorsed parts of the Tuscany M2 release. Specifically, the following jars should not be published:
>> groovy-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
>> databinding-castor-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
>> databinding-jaxb-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
>> databinding-xmlbeans-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
>> databinding-test-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
>> celtix-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
>> binding-jsonrpc-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
>>An option should be provided on the build to selectively publish only those extensions that have been endorsed as part of the Tuscany M2 release.
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-949) Incorrect set of extensions
published to the maven repo
Posted by "Jeremy Boynes (JIRA)" <tu...@ws.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949?page=comments#action_12454069 ]
Jeremy Boynes commented on TUSCANY-949:
---------------------------------------
I don't think we should use profiles in this way. We already use profiles (e.g. in SDO) to determine the type of content that gets built (e.g. in SDO we use them to generate aggregated vs. non-aggregated javadoc, in SCA we have a sourcecheck profile that enables checkstyle and pmd) but this is using them to determine which modules get built. I don't think this allows us to do something like run sourcecheck on the release modules for example.
This is really just trying to get modularity without doing the modularity work. It would be better to do that by restructuring the build into an appropriately modular tree.
> Incorrect set of extensions published to the maven repo
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TUSCANY-949
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949
> Project: Tuscany
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Build System
> Affects Versions: Java-M2
> Environment: all
> Reporter: Simon Nash
> Attachments: jira949.diff
>
>
> mvn deploy publishes a number of extensions to the maven repo that should not be published there because they are not fully tested and endorsed parts of the Tuscany M2 release. Specifically, the following jars should not be published:
> groovy-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-castor-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-jaxb-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-xmlbeans-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-test-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> celtix-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> binding-jsonrpc-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> An option should be provided on the build to selectively publish only those extensions that have been endorsed as part of the Tuscany M2 release.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
[jira] Updated: (TUSCANY-949) Incorrect set of extensions published
to the maven repo
Posted by "Simon Nash (JIRA)" <tu...@ws.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949?page=all ]
Simon Nash updated TUSCANY-949:
-------------------------------
Attachment: jira949.diff
The attached pom changes create two maven profiles for the build:
full (the default)
release (only builds projects intended for binary release)
To specify a release build, use the "-P release" option on the mvn command.
Example: mvn deploy -P release
To specify a full build, no special options are needed, as at present.
Example: mvn deploy
mvn install
mvn
> Incorrect set of extensions published to the maven repo
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TUSCANY-949
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949
> Project: Tuscany
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Build System
> Affects Versions: Java-M2
> Environment: all
> Reporter: Simon Nash
> Attachments: jira949.diff
>
>
> mvn deploy publishes a number of extensions to the maven repo that should not be published there because they are not fully tested and endorsed parts of the Tuscany M2 release. Specifically, the following jars should not be published:
> groovy-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-castor-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-jaxb-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-xmlbeans-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-test-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> celtix-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> binding-jsonrpc-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> An option should be provided on the build to selectively publish only those extensions that have been endorsed as part of the Tuscany M2 release.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
[jira] Closed: (TUSCANY-949) Incorrect set of extensions published
to the maven repo
Posted by "ant elder (JIRA)" <tu...@ws.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949?page=all ]
ant elder closed TUSCANY-949.
-----------------------------
Resolution: Fixed
Applied, thanks for the patch Simon.
There was some mailing list discussion on this, but after 5 days the only comments were for applying it, see: http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org/msg11208.html. If anything else does come up such as specific things to test or tweaks to improve the function then they can be done as further incremental changes.
> Incorrect set of extensions published to the maven repo
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TUSCANY-949
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949
> Project: Tuscany
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Build System
> Affects Versions: Java-M2
> Environment: all
> Reporter: Simon Nash
> Assigned To: ant elder
> Attachments: jira949.diff
>
>
> mvn deploy publishes a number of extensions to the maven repo that should not be published there because they are not fully tested and endorsed parts of the Tuscany M2 release. Specifically, the following jars should not be published:
> groovy-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-castor-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-jaxb-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-xmlbeans-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-test-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> celtix-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> binding-jsonrpc-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> An option should be provided on the build to selectively publish only those extensions that have been endorsed as part of the Tuscany M2 release.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
[jira] Assigned: (TUSCANY-949) Incorrect set of extensions
published to the maven repo
Posted by "ant elder (JIRA)" <tu...@ws.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949?page=all ]
ant elder reassigned TUSCANY-949:
---------------------------------
Assignee: ant elder
> Incorrect set of extensions published to the maven repo
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TUSCANY-949
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-949
> Project: Tuscany
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Build System
> Affects Versions: Java-M2
> Environment: all
> Reporter: Simon Nash
> Assigned To: ant elder
> Attachments: jira949.diff
>
>
> mvn deploy publishes a number of extensions to the maven repo that should not be published there because they are not fully tested and endorsed parts of the Tuscany M2 release. Specifically, the following jars should not be published:
> groovy-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-castor-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-jaxb-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-xmlbeans-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> databinding-test-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> celtix-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> binding-jsonrpc-1.0-incubator-M2.jar
> An option should be provided on the build to selectively publish only those extensions that have been endorsed as part of the Tuscany M2 release.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org