You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> on 2007/06/14 18:31:00 UTC
What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
> We've never had one, but I can certainly make one by exporting the
> tag and zipping it up. All the source archives to date are simply the
> source as record, they don't include anything in there to build them.
> I don't think this is useful at all to anyone but if it's a legal
> requirement to have a buildable-from-source distribution it will take
> me a few minutes to make it. I'm not sure Maven SCM supports and
> export that would work and I'm certainly not going to mess around
> with that at this stage to put in the build. But if we want to give
> people what I actually used to build the release then the tag should
> be exported and zipped up.
I did that (svn export and zip) for Archiva 0.9-alpha-2, but I had to
add LICENSE and NOTICE because they were not in svn. For Struts I use
the assembly plugin to piece together the same thing you get with svn
export.
Anyway, I don't think it's a legal requirement so much as it's "what
we do". I mentioned it when I cleaned up the /dist/maven directory,
and Henri commented on it then but we never finished the discussion.
The release FAQ is as close to ASF "policy" as we've got:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
"The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/bytecode
packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might not
have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the source.
..."
There's a similar conversation happening on commons-dev:
http://www.nabble.com/-all--What-is-a-release--WAS%3A--vote--releasing-jci-RC3-as-1.0-...maybe-this-time--t3898124.html#a11050531
--
Wendy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Stefano Bagnara <ap...@bago.org>.
Jason van Zyl ha scritto:
> On 14 Jun 07, at 2:32 PM 14 Jun 07, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>>
>> I have some statistic of downloads for Apache JAMES Server (email
>> server).
>>
>> We distribute both binary and source distributions:
>> [...]
>
> Do you actually deploy with Maven? I imagine you have the standard set
> of people debugging the sources. I would say that's the number one use
> of source downloads whereas with Maven coupled with doing proper
> releases, inside IDEs all current integration pull down the source and
> javadoc JARs. This is for Maven itself as well.
No, we don't deploy JAMES Server with maven yet.
And you may be right, but I see myself downloading source code of
libraries and projects even to see how they are organized and looking
around at the code.
I often find it more easy/fast than browsing it via web repository
explorers or manually checkout them.
In the end I think the license requirement is the real main reason to
still create source packages, but I would probably release them anyway.
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 14 Jun 07, at 2:32 PM 14 Jun 07, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> Jason van Zyl ha scritto:
>>
>> On 14 Jun 07, at 10:36 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not talking about what our users do, I'm talking about what the
>>> ASF policy seems to be
>>>
>>
>> Ask five people and you'll get five different answers.
>>
>> Bottom line is who cares, I'll keep adapting to what people think is
>> necessary and we'll feed it back into the system.
>
> I have some statistic of downloads for Apache JAMES Server (email
> server).
>
> We distribute both binary and source distributions:
>
> 2,584 binary.zip
> 589 binary.tar.gz
> -----
> 3,173
>
Do you actually deploy with Maven? I imagine you have the standard
set of people debugging the sources. I would say that's the number
one use of source downloads whereas with Maven coupled with doing
proper releases, inside IDEs all current integration pull down the
source and javadoc JARs. This is for Maven itself as well.
> 466 source.zip
> 118 source.tar.gz
> 343 sdksource.zip
> 164 source-withcontainer.zip
> -----
> 1,091
>
> So it seems 25% of all downloads were source distribution.
> It is not maven, but maybe this help your choices.
Takes me a couple minutes so it's not a big deal to make it.
>
> Furthermore I created a maven skin for apache james including code for
> Google Analytics, and expecially including special code so that
> links to
> package downloads to mirror sites are monitored on the onClick and
> added
> to statistics.
>
> if you are interested see the final part of this file:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/project/trunk/maven-skin/src/
> main/resources/META-INF/maven/site.vm?revision=532445&view=markup
>
> Stefano
>
>>> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 14 Jun 07, at 9:39 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> that's what I understood too, source release is mandatory and
>>>>> binary optional
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is a throwback to HTTPD where a source distribution made more
>>>> sense because of platform issues. I'm willing to bet 99.9999% of
>>>> users don't build from sources and take the binaries. Of course
>>>> it's
>>>> important to have the sources available but in all practical terms
>>>> most users will never use them.
>>>>
>>>>> On 6/14/07, Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We've never had one, but I can certainly make one by
>>>>>>> exporting the
>>>>>>> tag and zipping it up. All the source archives to date are
>>>>>> simply the
>>>>>>> source as record, they don't include anything in there to build
>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>> I don't think this is useful at all to anyone but if it's a
>>>>>>> legal
>>>>>>> requirement to have a buildable-from-source distribution it will
>>>>>> take
>>>>>>> me a few minutes to make it. I'm not sure Maven SCM supports and
>>>>>>> export that would work and I'm certainly not going to mess
>>>>>>> around
>>>>>>> with that at this stage to put in the build. But if we want
>>>>>>> to give
>>>>>>> people what I actually used to build the release then the tag
>>>>>> should
>>>>>>> be exported and zipped up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did that (svn export and zip) for Archiva 0.9-alpha-2, but I
>>>>>> had to
>>>>>> add LICENSE and NOTICE because they were not in svn. For
>>>>>> Struts I
>>>>>> use
>>>>>> the assembly plugin to piece together the same thing you get
>>>>>> with svn
>>>>>> export.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, I don't think it's a legal requirement so much as it's
>>>>>> "what
>>>>>> we do". I mentioned it when I cleaned up the /dist/maven
>>>>>> directory,
>>>>>> and Henri commented on it then but we never finished the
>>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The release FAQ is as close to ASF "policy" as we've got:
>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software.
>>>>>> All
>>>>>> releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
>>>>>> changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/
>>>>>> bytecode
>>>>>> packages are also produced as a convenience to users that
>>>>>> might not
>>>>>> have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the
>>>>>> source.
>>>>>> ..."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's a similar conversation happening on commons-dev:
>>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/-all--What-is-a-release--WAS%3A--vote--
>>>>>> releasing-jci-RC3-as-1.0-...maybe-this-time--
>>>>>> t3898124.html#a11050531
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Wendy
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Stefano Bagnara <io...@bago.org>.
Jason van Zyl ha scritto:
>
> On 14 Jun 07, at 10:36 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>
>> I'm not talking about what our users do, I'm talking about what the
>> ASF policy seems to be
>>
>
> Ask five people and you'll get five different answers.
>
> Bottom line is who cares, I'll keep adapting to what people think is
> necessary and we'll feed it back into the system.
I have some statistic of downloads for Apache JAMES Server (email server).
We distribute both binary and source distributions:
2,584 binary.zip
589 binary.tar.gz
-----
3,173
466 source.zip
118 source.tar.gz
343 sdksource.zip
164 source-withcontainer.zip
-----
1,091
So it seems 25% of all downloads were source distribution.
It is not maven, but maybe this help your choices.
Furthermore I created a maven skin for apache james including code for
Google Analytics, and expecially including special code so that links to
package downloads to mirror sites are monitored on the onClick and added
to statistics.
if you are interested see the final part of this file:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/project/trunk/maven-skin/src/main/resources/META-INF/maven/site.vm?revision=532445&view=markup
Stefano
>> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 14 Jun 07, at 9:39 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>>>
>>> > that's what I understood too, source release is mandatory and
>>> > binary optional
>>> >
>>>
>>> This is a throwback to HTTPD where a source distribution made more
>>> sense because of platform issues. I'm willing to bet 99.9999% of
>>> users don't build from sources and take the binaries. Of course it's
>>> important to have the sources available but in all practical terms
>>> most users will never use them.
>>>
>>> > On 6/14/07, Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > We've never had one, but I can certainly make one by exporting the
>>> >> > tag and zipping it up. All the source archives to date are
>>> >> simply the
>>> >> > source as record, they don't include anything in there to build
>>> >> them.
>>> >> > I don't think this is useful at all to anyone but if it's a legal
>>> >> > requirement to have a buildable-from-source distribution it will
>>> >> take
>>> >> > me a few minutes to make it. I'm not sure Maven SCM supports and
>>> >> > export that would work and I'm certainly not going to mess around
>>> >> > with that at this stage to put in the build. But if we want to give
>>> >> > people what I actually used to build the release then the tag
>>> >> should
>>> >> > be exported and zipped up.
>>> >>
>>> >> I did that (svn export and zip) for Archiva 0.9-alpha-2, but I had to
>>> >> add LICENSE and NOTICE because they were not in svn. For Struts I
>>> >> use
>>> >> the assembly plugin to piece together the same thing you get with svn
>>> >> export.
>>> >>
>>> >> Anyway, I don't think it's a legal requirement so much as it's "what
>>> >> we do". I mentioned it when I cleaned up the /dist/maven directory,
>>> >> and Henri commented on it then but we never finished the discussion.
>>> >>
>>> >> The release FAQ is as close to ASF "policy" as we've got:
>>> >> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>>> >>
>>> >> "The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
>>> >> releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
>>> >> changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/
>>> >> bytecode
>>> >> packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might not
>>> >> have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the source.
>>> >> ..."
>>> >>
>>> >> There's a similar conversation happening on commons-dev:
>>> >> http://www.nabble.com/-all--What-is-a-release--WAS%3A--vote--
>>> >> releasing-jci-RC3-as-1.0-...maybe-this-time--t3898124.html#a11050531
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Wendy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Stefano Bagnara <ap...@bago.org>.
Jason van Zyl ha scritto:
>
> On 14 Jun 07, at 10:36 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>
>> I'm not talking about what our users do, I'm talking about what the
>> ASF policy seems to be
>>
>
> Ask five people and you'll get five different answers.
>
> Bottom line is who cares, I'll keep adapting to what people think is
> necessary and we'll feed it back into the system.
I have some statistic of downloads for Apache JAMES Server (email server).
We distribute both binary and source distributions:
2,584 binary.zip
589 binary.tar.gz
-----
3,173
466 source.zip
118 source.tar.gz
343 sdksource.zip
164 source-withcontainer.zip
-----
1,091
So it seems 25% of all downloads were source distribution.
It is not maven, but maybe this help your choices.
Furthermore I created a maven skin for apache james including code for
Google Analytics, and expecially including special code so that links to
package downloads to mirror sites are monitored on the onClick and added
to statistics.
if you are interested see the final part of this file:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/project/trunk/maven-skin/src/main/resources/META-INF/maven/site.vm?revision=532445&view=markup
Stefano
>> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 14 Jun 07, at 9:39 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>>>
>>> > that's what I understood too, source release is mandatory and
>>> > binary optional
>>> >
>>>
>>> This is a throwback to HTTPD where a source distribution made more
>>> sense because of platform issues. I'm willing to bet 99.9999% of
>>> users don't build from sources and take the binaries. Of course it's
>>> important to have the sources available but in all practical terms
>>> most users will never use them.
>>>
>>> > On 6/14/07, Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > We've never had one, but I can certainly make one by exporting the
>>> >> > tag and zipping it up. All the source archives to date are
>>> >> simply the
>>> >> > source as record, they don't include anything in there to build
>>> >> them.
>>> >> > I don't think this is useful at all to anyone but if it's a legal
>>> >> > requirement to have a buildable-from-source distribution it will
>>> >> take
>>> >> > me a few minutes to make it. I'm not sure Maven SCM supports and
>>> >> > export that would work and I'm certainly not going to mess around
>>> >> > with that at this stage to put in the build. But if we want to give
>>> >> > people what I actually used to build the release then the tag
>>> >> should
>>> >> > be exported and zipped up.
>>> >>
>>> >> I did that (svn export and zip) for Archiva 0.9-alpha-2, but I had to
>>> >> add LICENSE and NOTICE because they were not in svn. For Struts I
>>> >> use
>>> >> the assembly plugin to piece together the same thing you get with svn
>>> >> export.
>>> >>
>>> >> Anyway, I don't think it's a legal requirement so much as it's "what
>>> >> we do". I mentioned it when I cleaned up the /dist/maven directory,
>>> >> and Henri commented on it then but we never finished the discussion.
>>> >>
>>> >> The release FAQ is as close to ASF "policy" as we've got:
>>> >> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>>> >>
>>> >> "The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
>>> >> releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
>>> >> changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/
>>> >> bytecode
>>> >> packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might not
>>> >> have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the source.
>>> >> ..."
>>> >>
>>> >> There's a similar conversation happening on commons-dev:
>>> >> http://www.nabble.com/-all--What-is-a-release--WAS%3A--vote--
>>> >> releasing-jci-RC3-as-1.0-...maybe-this-time--t3898124.html#a11050531
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Wendy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 14 Jun 07, at 10:36 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
> I'm not talking about what our users do, I'm talking about what the
> ASF policy seems to be
>
Ask five people and you'll get five different answers.
Bottom line is who cares, I'll keep adapting to what people think is
necessary and we'll feed it back into the system.
> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 14 Jun 07, at 9:39 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>>
>> > that's what I understood too, source release is mandatory and
>> > binary optional
>> >
>>
>> This is a throwback to HTTPD where a source distribution made more
>> sense because of platform issues. I'm willing to bet 99.9999% of
>> users don't build from sources and take the binaries. Of course it's
>> important to have the sources available but in all practical terms
>> most users will never use them.
>>
>> > On 6/14/07, Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > We've never had one, but I can certainly make one by
>> exporting the
>> >> > tag and zipping it up. All the source archives to date are
>> >> simply the
>> >> > source as record, they don't include anything in there to build
>> >> them.
>> >> > I don't think this is useful at all to anyone but if it's a
>> legal
>> >> > requirement to have a buildable-from-source distribution it will
>> >> take
>> >> > me a few minutes to make it. I'm not sure Maven SCM supports and
>> >> > export that would work and I'm certainly not going to mess
>> around
>> >> > with that at this stage to put in the build. But if we want
>> to give
>> >> > people what I actually used to build the release then the tag
>> >> should
>> >> > be exported and zipped up.
>> >>
>> >> I did that (svn export and zip) for Archiva 0.9-alpha-2, but I
>> had to
>> >> add LICENSE and NOTICE because they were not in svn. For Struts I
>> >> use
>> >> the assembly plugin to piece together the same thing you get
>> with svn
>> >> export.
>> >>
>> >> Anyway, I don't think it's a legal requirement so much as it's
>> "what
>> >> we do". I mentioned it when I cleaned up the /dist/maven
>> directory,
>> >> and Henri commented on it then but we never finished the
>> discussion.
>> >>
>> >> The release FAQ is as close to ASF "policy" as we've got:
>> >> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>> >>
>> >> "The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
>> >> releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
>> >> changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/
>> >> bytecode
>> >> packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might
>> not
>> >> have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the
>> source.
>> >> ..."
>> >>
>> >> There's a similar conversation happening on commons-dev:
>> >> http://www.nabble.com/-all--What-is-a-release--WAS%3A--vote--
>> >> releasing-jci-RC3-as-1.0-...maybe-this-time--
>> t3898124.html#a11050531
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Wendy
>> >>
>> >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
>> > No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
>> > -- The Princess Bride
>> >
>> >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
>> jason at sonatype dot com
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
> No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
> -- The Princess Bride
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Carlos Sanchez <ca...@apache.org>.
I'm not talking about what our users do, I'm talking about what the
ASF policy seems to be
On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>
> On 14 Jun 07, at 9:39 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>
> > that's what I understood too, source release is mandatory and
> > binary optional
> >
>
> This is a throwback to HTTPD where a source distribution made more
> sense because of platform issues. I'm willing to bet 99.9999% of
> users don't build from sources and take the binaries. Of course it's
> important to have the sources available but in all practical terms
> most users will never use them.
>
> > On 6/14/07, Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> > We've never had one, but I can certainly make one by exporting the
> >> > tag and zipping it up. All the source archives to date are
> >> simply the
> >> > source as record, they don't include anything in there to build
> >> them.
> >> > I don't think this is useful at all to anyone but if it's a legal
> >> > requirement to have a buildable-from-source distribution it will
> >> take
> >> > me a few minutes to make it. I'm not sure Maven SCM supports and
> >> > export that would work and I'm certainly not going to mess around
> >> > with that at this stage to put in the build. But if we want to give
> >> > people what I actually used to build the release then the tag
> >> should
> >> > be exported and zipped up.
> >>
> >> I did that (svn export and zip) for Archiva 0.9-alpha-2, but I had to
> >> add LICENSE and NOTICE because they were not in svn. For Struts I
> >> use
> >> the assembly plugin to piece together the same thing you get with svn
> >> export.
> >>
> >> Anyway, I don't think it's a legal requirement so much as it's "what
> >> we do". I mentioned it when I cleaned up the /dist/maven directory,
> >> and Henri commented on it then but we never finished the discussion.
> >>
> >> The release FAQ is as close to ASF "policy" as we've got:
> >> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> >>
> >> "The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
> >> releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
> >> changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/
> >> bytecode
> >> packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might not
> >> have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the source.
> >> ..."
> >>
> >> There's a similar conversation happening on commons-dev:
> >> http://www.nabble.com/-all--What-is-a-release--WAS%3A--vote--
> >> releasing-jci-RC3-as-1.0-...maybe-this-time--t3898124.html#a11050531
> >>
> >> --
> >> Wendy
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
> > No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
> > -- The Princess Bride
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
> jason at sonatype dot com
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
--
I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
-- The Princess Bride
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
All done for 2.0.8-SNAPSHOT and 2.1-SNAPSHOT.
- Brett
On 15/06/2007, at 12:10 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
> On 15/06/2007, at 11:45 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>>
>>> I'll try adding it to the POM under a release profile.
>>>
>>
>> If you're going to add it to the POM make sure you:
>>
>> - export the tag
>> - take the whole thing in it's entirety so someone could actually
>> build the release
>> - use the same licenses
>> - integrate the profile for signing and checksumming
>
> Yes, will do.
>
>>>
>>> <hat type="downstream-packager">
>>> We've recently decided to stop pulling from SVN and use release
>>> source tarballs instead for releases (we'll continue using SVN
>>> for development purposes, of course).
>>> </hat>
>>>
>>
>> No you didn't because the last one that would have worked is 2.0.3.
>>
>
> "recently decided" - the first one will be based off 2.0.7.
>
> - Brett
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 15/06/2007, at 11:45 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> I'll try adding it to the POM under a release profile.
>>
>
> If you're going to add it to the POM make sure you:
>
> - export the tag
> - take the whole thing in it's entirety so someone could actually
> build the release
> - use the same licenses
> - integrate the profile for signing and checksumming
Yes, will do.
>>
>> <hat type="downstream-packager">
>> We've recently decided to stop pulling from SVN and use release
>> source tarballs instead for releases (we'll continue using SVN for
>> development purposes, of course).
>> </hat>
>>
>
> No you didn't because the last one that would have worked is 2.0.3.
>
"recently decided" - the first one will be based off 2.0.7.
- Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 14 Jun 07, at 5:39 PM 14 Jun 07, Brett Porter wrote:
>>> this is open source. cutting source releases means that the
>>> source for a
>>> release will always be available.
>
> I agree, we should definitely be producing a source tarball that is
> signed and voted on. I fully admit to being slack in the first few
> releases, but we had them for 2.0.3, 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 so should
> continue. Thanks for putting it together as well.
>
Go look at anything made in the past, none of them were buildable
distributions except 2.0.3 (2.0, 2.0.1, and 2.0.2 don't seem to be
archived so I don't know about those). So obviously no one is using
them for packaging anything downstream. This will be the first
release with a usable source distribution since 2.0.3. But like I
said before I doubt anyone really cares as no one has ever complained
about them. What's there could be used for debugging which is good
but as something you could use for a release, never happened. 2.0.3
is usable, 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 are not. Wasn't one with 2.0.6.
> I'll try adding it to the POM under a release profile.
>
If you're going to add it to the POM make sure you:
- export the tag
- take the whole thing in it's entirety so someone could actually
build the release
- use the same licenses
- integrate the profile for signing and checksumming
>>> users don't use source distributions but downstream developers
>>> and packagers
>>> do.
>>>
>>
>> No they don't. They check things out of SVN and create vendor
>> branches. I don't know a single tools vendor who doesn't use SCM
>> of the tool they are integrating.
>
> <hat type="downstream-packager">
> We've recently decided to stop pulling from SVN and use release
> source tarballs instead for releases (we'll continue using SVN for
> development purposes, of course).
> </hat>
>
No you didn't because the last one that would have worked is 2.0.3.
> Cheers,
> Brett
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
>> this is open source. cutting source releases means that the source
>> for a
>> release will always be available.
I agree, we should definitely be producing a source tarball that is
signed and voted on. I fully admit to being slack in the first few
releases, but we had them for 2.0.3, 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 so should
continue. Thanks for putting it together as well.
I'll try adding it to the POM under a release profile.
>> users don't use source distributions but downstream developers and
>> packagers
>> do.
>>
>
> No they don't. They check things out of SVN and create vendor
> branches. I don't know a single tools vendor who doesn't use SCM of
> the tool they are integrating.
<hat type="downstream-packager">
We've recently decided to stop pulling from SVN and use release
source tarballs instead for releases (we'll continue using SVN for
development purposes, of course).
</hat>
Cheers,
Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 14 Jun 07, at 10:34 AM 14 Jun 07, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 14 Jun 07, at 9:39 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>>
>> > that's what I understood too, source release is mandatory and
>> > binary optional
>> >
>>
>> This is a throwback to HTTPD where a source distribution made more
>> sense because of platform issues. I'm willing to bet 99.9999% of
>> users don't build from sources and take the binaries. Of course it's
>> important to have the sources available but in all practical terms
>> most users will never use them.
>
>
> users don't use source distributions but downstream developers and
> packagers
> do.
>
No they don't. They check things out of SVN and create vendor
branches. I don't know a single tools vendor who doesn't use SCM of
the tool they are integrating.
> this is open source. cutting source releases means that the source
> for a
> release will always be available.
> - robert
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 14 Jun 07, at 9:39 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>
> > that's what I understood too, source release is mandatory and
> > binary optional
> >
>
> This is a throwback to HTTPD where a source distribution made more
> sense because of platform issues. I'm willing to bet 99.9999% of
> users don't build from sources and take the binaries. Of course it's
> important to have the sources available but in all practical terms
> most users will never use them.
users don't use source distributions but downstream developers and packagers
do.
this is open source. cutting source releases means that the source for a
release will always be available.
- robert
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 14 Jun 07, at 9:39 AM 14 Jun 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
> that's what I understood too, source release is mandatory and
> binary optional
>
This is a throwback to HTTPD where a source distribution made more
sense because of platform issues. I'm willing to bet 99.9999% of
users don't build from sources and take the binaries. Of course it's
important to have the sources available but in all practical terms
most users will never use them.
> On 6/14/07, Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>>
>> > We've never had one, but I can certainly make one by exporting the
>> > tag and zipping it up. All the source archives to date are
>> simply the
>> > source as record, they don't include anything in there to build
>> them.
>> > I don't think this is useful at all to anyone but if it's a legal
>> > requirement to have a buildable-from-source distribution it will
>> take
>> > me a few minutes to make it. I'm not sure Maven SCM supports and
>> > export that would work and I'm certainly not going to mess around
>> > with that at this stage to put in the build. But if we want to give
>> > people what I actually used to build the release then the tag
>> should
>> > be exported and zipped up.
>>
>> I did that (svn export and zip) for Archiva 0.9-alpha-2, but I had to
>> add LICENSE and NOTICE because they were not in svn. For Struts I
>> use
>> the assembly plugin to piece together the same thing you get with svn
>> export.
>>
>> Anyway, I don't think it's a legal requirement so much as it's "what
>> we do". I mentioned it when I cleaned up the /dist/maven directory,
>> and Henri commented on it then but we never finished the discussion.
>>
>> The release FAQ is as close to ASF "policy" as we've got:
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>>
>> "The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
>> releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
>> changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/
>> bytecode
>> packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might not
>> have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the source.
>> ..."
>>
>> There's a similar conversation happening on commons-dev:
>> http://www.nabble.com/-all--What-is-a-release--WAS%3A--vote--
>> releasing-jci-RC3-as-1.0-...maybe-this-time--t3898124.html#a11050531
>>
>> --
>> Wendy
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
> No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
> -- The Princess Bride
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: What is a release? (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven 2.0.7)
Posted by Carlos Sanchez <ca...@apache.org>.
that's what I understood too, source release is mandatory and binary optional
On 6/14/07, Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/14/07, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>
> > We've never had one, but I can certainly make one by exporting the
> > tag and zipping it up. All the source archives to date are simply the
> > source as record, they don't include anything in there to build them.
> > I don't think this is useful at all to anyone but if it's a legal
> > requirement to have a buildable-from-source distribution it will take
> > me a few minutes to make it. I'm not sure Maven SCM supports and
> > export that would work and I'm certainly not going to mess around
> > with that at this stage to put in the build. But if we want to give
> > people what I actually used to build the release then the tag should
> > be exported and zipped up.
>
> I did that (svn export and zip) for Archiva 0.9-alpha-2, but I had to
> add LICENSE and NOTICE because they were not in svn. For Struts I use
> the assembly plugin to piece together the same thing you get with svn
> export.
>
> Anyway, I don't think it's a legal requirement so much as it's "what
> we do". I mentioned it when I cleaned up the /dist/maven directory,
> and Henri commented on it then but we never finished the discussion.
>
> The release FAQ is as close to ASF "policy" as we've got:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>
> "The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
> releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
> changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/bytecode
> packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might not
> have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the source.
> ..."
>
> There's a similar conversation happening on commons-dev:
> http://www.nabble.com/-all--What-is-a-release--WAS%3A--vote--releasing-jci-RC3-as-1.0-...maybe-this-time--t3898124.html#a11050531
>
> --
> Wendy
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
--
I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
-- The Princess Bride
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org