You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org> on 2011/08/02 16:23:57 UTC
Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Are we still going to deploy Maven artifacts by SCPing to
m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository on people.apache.org?
I've been discussing the permissions issue for the old groupIds on Nexus
with the Infra team (i.e components using the old groupId
commons-<componentname> need a specific configuration on the snapshot
and release repositories).
Brian Demers kindly proposed to allow the deployment of all commons-*
groups on Nexus, but it would require to block the deployment through
people.apache.org to avoid metadata conflicts.
Do we all agree on using exclusively Nexus for our releases?
Emmanuel Bourg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
On 03/08/2011 06:36, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> What benefits do we get by using Nexus
>
> A real lot of work saved. (Beleave me. I've been RM for the same
> projects with and without Nexus and it's really a difference.)
I fail to see why this is the case. Tomcat releases to the Maven repos
and to /dist and doesn't go anywhere near Nexus yet is still minimal
effort. An entire release takes 2-3 minutes of actual effort (and about
90 minutes of waiting for stuff to upload).
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org>.
>
> I am also worried about a closed tool like Nexus being used to publish
> Apache stuff.
>
> Luc
>
This is curious, indeed. I always wondered why we use Nexus instead of
"eating our own dog food" Apache Archiva[1], but worried to receive a
reply "why didn't you RTFM on http://xyz..." :P
Have a nice day!!!
Simo
[1] http://archiva.apache.org/
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
On Aug 2, 2011, at 11:45 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> I am also worried about a closed tool like Nexus being used to publish Apache stuff.
>
Nexus is not completely closed. There is a community version that contains 90% of the functionality. That said, I really don't want to go look at the source code for any of the repository managers.
Ralph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 8/3/11 9:09 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 3 August 2011 09:13, Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Luc Maisonobe <Lu...@free.fr> wrote:
>>
>>> I am also worried about a closed tool like Nexus being used to publish
>>> Apache stuff.
>> That discussion was made years ago, when Nexus was introduced. And,
>> for the record, I strongly opposed Nexus at that time in favour of
>> other solutions, in particular Archiva, for that very reason.
> AIUI, Nexus offers a staging facility, which Archiva does not (or did
> not at the time - maybe it does now).
>
> i.e. it allows the artifacts to be uploaded to a public location,
> which can be used for the release vote.
Which we can also do on p.a.o.
>
> If the vote succeeds, publish the staged repo; if it fails, drop it.
>
> There's no danger of accidentally releasing Maven artifacts that have
> not been voted on (as happened in Commons about a year ago before that
> component used Nexus).
Which only happened because the RM was using the maven release plugin.
Phil
>
>> Now that we have Nexus, I won't fight such wars again and again. It's
>> there and it's gonna stay. Just like Jira, or Confluence, for that
>> matter, and I can't remember similar discussions in that area.
>>
>> Jochen
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men
>> will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of
>> everyone.
>>
>> John Maynard Keynes (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Keynes)
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 3 August 2011 09:13, Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Luc Maisonobe <Lu...@free.fr> wrote:
>
>> I am also worried about a closed tool like Nexus being used to publish
>> Apache stuff.
>
> That discussion was made years ago, when Nexus was introduced. And,
> for the record, I strongly opposed Nexus at that time in favour of
> other solutions, in particular Archiva, for that very reason.
AIUI, Nexus offers a staging facility, which Archiva does not (or did
not at the time - maybe it does now).
i.e. it allows the artifacts to be uploaded to a public location,
which can be used for the release vote.
If the vote succeeds, publish the staged repo; if it fails, drop it.
There's no danger of accidentally releasing Maven artifacts that have
not been voted on (as happened in Commons about a year ago before that
component used Nexus).
> Now that we have Nexus, I won't fight such wars again and again. It's
> there and it's gonna stay. Just like Jira, or Confluence, for that
> matter, and I can't remember similar discussions in that area.
>
> Jochen
>
>
>
> --
> Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men
> will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of
> everyone.
>
> John Maynard Keynes (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Keynes)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Luc Maisonobe <Lu...@free.fr> wrote:
> I am also worried about a closed tool like Nexus being used to publish
> Apache stuff.
That discussion was made years ago, when Nexus was introduced. And,
for the record, I strongly opposed Nexus at that time in favour of
other solutions, in particular Archiva, for that very reason.
Now that we have Nexus, I won't fight such wars again and again. It's
there and it's gonna stay. Just like Jira, or Confluence, for that
matter, and I can't remember similar discussions in that area.
Jochen
--
Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men
will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of
everyone.
John Maynard Keynes (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Keynes)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Luc Maisonobe <Lu...@free.fr>.
Le 03/08/2011 08:40, Phil Steitz a écrit :
> On 8/2/11 11:30 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Phil Steitz<ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Nothing, other than that is exactly what I do and I know exactly
>>> what is going on. I don't see any real saving, that's all and I see
>>> no need to bring in proprietary gui-based software into the mix or
>>> to wget stuff from remote hosts. Nobody else seems to care about
>>> this, but you actually should perform a step that I don't - which is
>>> to verify the hashes after you move the stuff to dist/
>> Why should I? They have been built by Maven or Nexus automatically?
>
> When you transfer files on the Internet, they can get corrupted in
> transit. This is why we *have* hashes on the files. When you put
> the files on p.a.o and we VOTE on the bits there, you can just move
> them to /dist without worrying about integrity.
>
> And I seriously hope nothing is being "built by nexus" :)
I am also worried about a closed tool like Nexus being used to publish
Apache stuff.
Luc
>
> Phil
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 8/2/11 11:30 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Nothing, other than that is exactly what I do and I know exactly
>> what is going on. I don't see any real saving, that's all and I see
>> no need to bring in proprietary gui-based software into the mix or
>> to wget stuff from remote hosts. Nobody else seems to care about
>> this, but you actually should perform a step that I don't - which is
>> to verify the hashes after you move the stuff to dist/
> Why should I? They have been built by Maven or Nexus automatically?
When you transfer files on the Internet, they can get corrupted in
transit. This is why we *have* hashes on the files. When you put
the files on p.a.o and we VOTE on the bits there, you can just move
them to /dist without worrying about integrity.
And I seriously hope nothing is being "built by nexus" :)
Phil
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nothing, other than that is exactly what I do and I know exactly
> what is going on. I don't see any real saving, that's all and I see
> no need to bring in proprietary gui-based software into the mix or
> to wget stuff from remote hosts. Nobody else seems to care about
> this, but you actually should perform a step that I don't - which is
> to verify the hashes after you move the stuff to dist/
Why should I? They have been built by Maven or Nexus automatically?
--
Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men
will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of
everyone.
John Maynard Keynes (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Keynes)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 8/2/11 11:09 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I am not so sure about that. I guess it depends on what kind of
>> simple scripts you are willing to use to automate things and how
>> much you care about being certain that that things are working and
>> you know exactly what is going on. Personally, I would prefer that
>> this machinery be visible and not require web gui games or plaintext
>> passwords to work. I like the way tomcat does this and I will
>> volunteer to develop and document a similar set of Ant tasks for
>> Commons if others are willing to move back to replicating o.a.c
>> groupIds from p.a.o.
> Phil, my "simple script" is the POM. With Nexus, my manual steps are
> typically reduced to copying the -src and -bin files out of the
> repository (wget's good for that and it copies the whole directory at
> one go) and copying these to the dist directory. Honestly, there are
> some things remaining like setting the -current links, updating the
> README and perhaps the KEYS file and fixing the permissions. But these
> are left to do anyways.
>
> What's wrong with that procedure?
Nothing, other than that is exactly what I do and I know exactly
what is going on. I don't see any real saving, that's all and I see
no need to bring in proprietary gui-based software into the mix or
to wget stuff from remote hosts. Nobody else seems to care about
this, but you actually should perform a step that I don't - which is
to verify the hashes after you move the stuff to dist/
Phil
>
> Jochen
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am not so sure about that. I guess it depends on what kind of
> simple scripts you are willing to use to automate things and how
> much you care about being certain that that things are working and
> you know exactly what is going on. Personally, I would prefer that
> this machinery be visible and not require web gui games or plaintext
> passwords to work. I like the way tomcat does this and I will
> volunteer to develop and document a similar set of Ant tasks for
> Commons if others are willing to move back to replicating o.a.c
> groupIds from p.a.o.
Phil, my "simple script" is the POM. With Nexus, my manual steps are
typically reduced to copying the -src and -bin files out of the
repository (wget's good for that and it copies the whole directory at
one go) and copying these to the dist directory. Honestly, there are
some things remaining like setting the -current links, updating the
README and perhaps the KEYS file and fixing the permissions. But these
are left to do anyways.
What's wrong with that procedure?
Jochen
--
Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men
will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of
everyone.
John Maynard Keynes (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Keynes)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 8/2/11 10:36 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> What benefits do we get by using Nexus
> A real lot of work saved. (Beleave me. I've been RM for the same
> projects with and without Nexus and it's really a difference.)
>
I am not so sure about that. I guess it depends on what kind of
simple scripts you are willing to use to automate things and how
much you care about being certain that that things are working and
you know exactly what is going on. Personally, I would prefer that
this machinery be visible and not require web gui games or plaintext
passwords to work. I like the way tomcat does this and I will
volunteer to develop and document a similar set of Ant tasks for
Commons if others are willing to move back to replicating o.a.c
groupIds from p.a.o.
Phil
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> What benefits do we get by using Nexus
A real lot of work saved. (Beleave me. I've been RM for the same
projects with and without Nexus and it's really a difference.)
--
Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men
will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of
everyone.
John Maynard Keynes (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Keynes)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 2 August 2011 15:29, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 02/08/2011 15:23, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>> Are we still going to deploy Maven artifacts by SCPing to
>> m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository on people.apache.org?
>>
>> I've been discussing the permissions issue for the old groupIds on Nexus
>> with the Infra team (i.e components using the old groupId
>> commons-<componentname> need a specific configuration on the snapshot
>> and release repositories).
>>
>> Brian Demers kindly proposed to allow the deployment of all commons-*
>> groups on Nexus, but it would require to block the deployment through
>> people.apache.org to avoid metadata conflicts.
>>
>> Do we all agree on using exclusively Nexus for our releases?
>
> What benefits do we get by using Nexus and what extra hoops do we have
> to jump through to get them compared to just using scp?
The benefits are:
* metadata is automatically updated
* intercepts all uploads, so cannot accidentally deploy to live repo
* automatically checks that signing keys are publicly available
* ensures that the artifacts voted on are the ones actually deployed
Nexus is automatically used if the gid is o.a.commons.
One just has to use "mvn deploy" and the artifacts will be uploaded to
the staging area.
The extra steps that have to be done are:
1) Close the staging repo once all the artifacts have been uploaded.
This makes the staging area visible for release votes.
2a) Publish the staging repo once the release vote has passed. This
allows the artifacts to propagate to Maven Central.
OR
2b) Drop the staged artifacts, and re-roll the release.
> Mark
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
On 02/08/2011 15:23, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Are we still going to deploy Maven artifacts by SCPing to
> m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository on people.apache.org?
>
> I've been discussing the permissions issue for the old groupIds on Nexus
> with the Infra team (i.e components using the old groupId
> commons-<componentname> need a specific configuration on the snapshot
> and release repositories).
>
> Brian Demers kindly proposed to allow the deployment of all commons-*
> groups on Nexus, but it would require to block the deployment through
> people.apache.org to avoid metadata conflicts.
>
> Do we all agree on using exclusively Nexus for our releases?
What benefits do we get by using Nexus and what extra hoops do we have
to jump through to get them compared to just using scp?
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Oliver Heger <ol...@oliver-heger.de>.
Am 03.08.2011 07:32, schrieb Henri Yandell:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Phil Steitz<ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 8/2/11 5:22 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Emmanuel Bourg<eb...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Are we still going to deploy Maven artifacts by SCPing to
>>>> m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository on people.apache.org?
>>>>
>>>> I've been discussing the permissions issue for the old groupIds on Nexus
>>>> with the Infra team (i.e components using the old groupId
>>>> commons-<componentname> need a specific configuration on the snapshot and
>>>> release repositories).
>>>>
>>>> Brian Demers kindly proposed to allow the deployment of all commons-* groups
>>>> on Nexus, but it would require to block the deployment through
>>>> people.apache.org to avoid metadata conflicts.
>>>>
>>>> Do we all agree on using exclusively Nexus for our releases?
>>
>> I would prefer to leave the door open to release more point releases
>> of [pool] and [dbcp] 1.x using the working scripts that i have, so
>> pls do not nuke those. The new versions are in the org.apache
>> groupId tree, so we will have no choice but to use nexus for those.
>>
>> I will have agree to use nexus for the maven repo bits, but prefer
>> to create the actual release artifacts locally, examine them, call a
>> VOTE on them and move the same bits to /dist. Personally, I would
>> rather see us move back the other way (use the Tomcat setup, with
>> Ant tasks pushing to p.a.o/rysnch), but I can see I am in the
>> minority here, so will not stand in the way.
>
> Well, I'm in the same minority and I'm not aware it's a minority (have
> we taken a vote from those release managing?).
>
> Nexus, Maven release-plugin, they all fire off my keep-it-simple
> warning flags. They mistake magic for simplicity.
I count myself to the same group.
However, for me the most important point is that there is a really
fool-proof description of the release process. Do we already have this
for Nexus?
Oliver
>
> Hen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 8/3/11 2:14 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 8/3/11 1:37 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 8/2/11 5:22 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Are we still going to deploy Maven artifacts by SCPing to
>>>>>> m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository on people.apache.org?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been discussing the permissions issue for the old groupIds on Nexus
>>>>>> with the Infra team (i.e components using the old groupId
>>>>>> commons-<componentname> need a specific configuration on the snapshot and
>>>>>> release repositories).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Brian Demers kindly proposed to allow the deployment of all commons-* groups
>>>>>> on Nexus, but it would require to block the deployment through
>>>>>> people.apache.org to avoid metadata conflicts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do we all agree on using exclusively Nexus for our releases?
>>>> I would prefer to leave the door open to release more point releases
>>>> of [pool] and [dbcp] 1.x using the working scripts that i have, so
>>>> pls do not nuke those. The new versions are in the org.apache
>>>> groupId tree, so we will have no choice but to use nexus for those.
>>>>
>>>> I will have agree to use nexus for the maven repo bits, but prefer
>>>> to create the actual release artifacts locally, examine them, call a
>>>> VOTE on them and move the same bits to /dist. Personally, I would
>>>> rather see us move back the other way (use the Tomcat setup, with
>>>> Ant tasks pushing to p.a.o/rysnch), but I can see I am in the
>>>> minority here, so will not stand in the way.
>>> Well, I'm in the same minority and I'm not aware it's a minority (have
>>> we taken a vote from those release managing?).
>> Me too. When maven works, its great - but when it doesn't it makes you
>> want to tear your hair out. The only releases I've done using the
>> release plugin were commons-parent & the build plugin. That was a
>> while ago, but more often than not there were issues.
> Hmm.... Based on comments on this thread, looks like I may not be
> in the minority on this.
>
> I am willing to do the following:
>
> 0) Either a) create an Ant deployment script similar to what Tomcat
> uses [1] or b) create a generic bash script that can be run from
> p.a.o to deploy from ~rm/foo-x.y.x-RCw
> 1) Update the web site docs so we have full and working documentation
>
> Either of the options in 0) require that we move back to publishing
> from ibiblio-rsync from p.a.o (and we have to be able to get this
> reverted - not sure this is even possible at this point, but we
> could ask). If we decide to start publishing snapshots, we can use
> the same approach for these.
Forgot the link:
[1] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk/res/maven/mvn-pub.xml
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>
>> Niall
>>
>>
>>> Nexus, Maven release-plugin, they all fire off my keep-it-simple
>>> warning flags. They mistake magic for simplicity.
>>>
>>> Hen
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 8/3/11 1:37 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 8/2/11 5:22 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> Are we still going to deploy Maven artifacts by SCPing to
>>>>> m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository on people.apache.org?
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been discussing the permissions issue for the old groupIds on Nexus
>>>>> with the Infra team (i.e components using the old groupId
>>>>> commons-<componentname> need a specific configuration on the snapshot and
>>>>> release repositories).
>>>>>
>>>>> Brian Demers kindly proposed to allow the deployment of all commons-* groups
>>>>> on Nexus, but it would require to block the deployment through
>>>>> people.apache.org to avoid metadata conflicts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do we all agree on using exclusively Nexus for our releases?
>>> I would prefer to leave the door open to release more point releases
>>> of [pool] and [dbcp] 1.x using the working scripts that i have, so
>>> pls do not nuke those. The new versions are in the org.apache
>>> groupId tree, so we will have no choice but to use nexus for those.
>>>
>>> I will have agree to use nexus for the maven repo bits, but prefer
>>> to create the actual release artifacts locally, examine them, call a
>>> VOTE on them and move the same bits to /dist. Personally, I would
>>> rather see us move back the other way (use the Tomcat setup, with
>>> Ant tasks pushing to p.a.o/rysnch), but I can see I am in the
>>> minority here, so will not stand in the way.
>> Well, I'm in the same minority and I'm not aware it's a minority (have
>> we taken a vote from those release managing?).
> Me too. When maven works, its great - but when it doesn't it makes you
> want to tear your hair out. The only releases I've done using the
> release plugin were commons-parent & the build plugin. That was a
> while ago, but more often than not there were issues.
Hmm.... Based on comments on this thread, looks like I may not be
in the minority on this.
I am willing to do the following:
0) Either a) create an Ant deployment script similar to what Tomcat
uses [1] or b) create a generic bash script that can be run from
p.a.o to deploy from ~rm/foo-x.y.x-RCw
1) Update the web site docs so we have full and working documentation
Either of the options in 0) require that we move back to publishing
from ibiblio-rsync from p.a.o (and we have to be able to get this
reverted - not sure this is even possible at this point, but we
could ask). If we decide to start publishing snapshots, we can use
the same approach for these.
Phil
> Niall
>
>
>> Nexus, Maven release-plugin, they all fire off my keep-it-simple
>> warning flags. They mistake magic for simplicity.
>>
>> Hen
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 8/2/11 5:22 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Are we still going to deploy Maven artifacts by SCPing to
>>>> m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository on people.apache.org?
>>>>
>>>> I've been discussing the permissions issue for the old groupIds on Nexus
>>>> with the Infra team (i.e components using the old groupId
>>>> commons-<componentname> need a specific configuration on the snapshot and
>>>> release repositories).
>>>>
>>>> Brian Demers kindly proposed to allow the deployment of all commons-* groups
>>>> on Nexus, but it would require to block the deployment through
>>>> people.apache.org to avoid metadata conflicts.
>>>>
>>>> Do we all agree on using exclusively Nexus for our releases?
>>
>> I would prefer to leave the door open to release more point releases
>> of [pool] and [dbcp] 1.x using the working scripts that i have, so
>> pls do not nuke those. The new versions are in the org.apache
>> groupId tree, so we will have no choice but to use nexus for those.
>>
>> I will have agree to use nexus for the maven repo bits, but prefer
>> to create the actual release artifacts locally, examine them, call a
>> VOTE on them and move the same bits to /dist. Personally, I would
>> rather see us move back the other way (use the Tomcat setup, with
>> Ant tasks pushing to p.a.o/rysnch), but I can see I am in the
>> minority here, so will not stand in the way.
>
> Well, I'm in the same minority and I'm not aware it's a minority (have
> we taken a vote from those release managing?).
Me too. When maven works, its great - but when it doesn't it makes you
want to tear your hair out. The only releases I've done using the
release plugin were commons-parent & the build plugin. That was a
while ago, but more often than not there were issues.
Niall
> Nexus, Maven release-plugin, they all fire off my keep-it-simple
> warning flags. They mistake magic for simplicity.
>
> Hen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/2/11 5:22 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Are we still going to deploy Maven artifacts by SCPing to
>>> m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository on people.apache.org?
>>>
>>> I've been discussing the permissions issue for the old groupIds on Nexus
>>> with the Infra team (i.e components using the old groupId
>>> commons-<componentname> need a specific configuration on the snapshot and
>>> release repositories).
>>>
>>> Brian Demers kindly proposed to allow the deployment of all commons-* groups
>>> on Nexus, but it would require to block the deployment through
>>> people.apache.org to avoid metadata conflicts.
>>>
>>> Do we all agree on using exclusively Nexus for our releases?
>
> I would prefer to leave the door open to release more point releases
> of [pool] and [dbcp] 1.x using the working scripts that i have, so
> pls do not nuke those. The new versions are in the org.apache
> groupId tree, so we will have no choice but to use nexus for those.
>
> I will have agree to use nexus for the maven repo bits, but prefer
> to create the actual release artifacts locally, examine them, call a
> VOTE on them and move the same bits to /dist. Personally, I would
> rather see us move back the other way (use the Tomcat setup, with
> Ant tasks pushing to p.a.o/rysnch), but I can see I am in the
> minority here, so will not stand in the way.
Well, I'm in the same minority and I'm not aware it's a minority (have
we taken a vote from those release managing?).
Nexus, Maven release-plugin, they all fire off my keep-it-simple
warning flags. They mistake magic for simplicity.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 8/2/11 5:22 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Are we still going to deploy Maven artifacts by SCPing to
>> m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository on people.apache.org?
>>
>> I've been discussing the permissions issue for the old groupIds on Nexus
>> with the Infra team (i.e components using the old groupId
>> commons-<componentname> need a specific configuration on the snapshot and
>> release repositories).
>>
>> Brian Demers kindly proposed to allow the deployment of all commons-* groups
>> on Nexus, but it would require to block the deployment through
>> people.apache.org to avoid metadata conflicts.
>>
>> Do we all agree on using exclusively Nexus for our releases?
I would prefer to leave the door open to release more point releases
of [pool] and [dbcp] 1.x using the working scripts that i have, so
pls do not nuke those. The new versions are in the org.apache
groupId tree, so we will have no choice but to use nexus for those.
I will have agree to use nexus for the maven repo bits, but prefer
to create the actual release artifacts locally, examine them, call a
VOTE on them and move the same bits to /dist. Personally, I would
rather see us move back the other way (use the Tomcat setup, with
Ant tasks pushing to p.a.o/rysnch), but I can see I am in the
minority here, so will not stand in the way.
Phil
> I use the Commons release process:
>
> http://commons.apache.org/releases/index.html
>
> Meaning, that if you replace that with something of equal depth that
> is Nexus related, then I'll do my best to adapt. Until then I'll
> follow the docs (and then upload my Maven jars as an afterthought).
>
> Please make sure there's no part of the doc that says "put your
> passphrase/password in a plaintext file" :)
>
> Hen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Nexus vs rsync-repository releases
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org> wrote:
> Are we still going to deploy Maven artifacts by SCPing to
> m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository on people.apache.org?
>
> I've been discussing the permissions issue for the old groupIds on Nexus
> with the Infra team (i.e components using the old groupId
> commons-<componentname> need a specific configuration on the snapshot and
> release repositories).
>
> Brian Demers kindly proposed to allow the deployment of all commons-* groups
> on Nexus, but it would require to block the deployment through
> people.apache.org to avoid metadata conflicts.
>
> Do we all agree on using exclusively Nexus for our releases?
I use the Commons release process:
http://commons.apache.org/releases/index.html
Meaning, that if you replace that with something of equal depth that
is Nexus related, then I'll do my best to adapt. Until then I'll
follow the docs (and then upload my Maven jars as an afterthought).
Please make sure there's no part of the doc that says "put your
passphrase/password in a plaintext file" :)
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org