You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@river.apache.org by Greg Trasuk <tr...@stratuscom.com> on 2013/05/06 21:14:26 UTC
Questions on the Maven poms...
Hi all:
I'm going through the "project poms" that Dennis contributed in
preparation for spinning the 2.2.1 release to the Apache Maven
repository (and hence to Central), and I have a few questions...
Should the poms call out a parent pom that specifies the version and all
the licensing? Right now they're independent. There's actually an
official Apache parent pom available, but since we don't build using
Maven, I don't think we need to call out the Apache parent.
>From what I read on the rules for submission to Maven Central, we need
to provide javadoc- and source- jars for all the artifacts. In the case
of River this works out a little funny because we generate many jars
(services and downloads) from the same codebase. It appears that we'd
be fine with providing "fake" javadoc and source jars that contain a
README file that points to the real sources and javadocs. Any feelings
about whether we need to do this, or should we?
The group-id is currently "net.jini" in the poms. I don't know if INFRA
will give us grief over not using an "org.apache" group id (maybe
someone already asked them?). Should these be "org.apache.river"?
Lastly, I'm fairly convinced that since the Maven artifacts will be
separate, signed release artifacts, that we will need to call a release
vote on those artifacts after staging them to Apache's Nexus
repository. That doesn't mean they are "2.2.2", but we need to approve
the artifacts. Does anyone feel otherwise?
Cheers,
Greg.
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Dennis Reedy <de...@gmail.com>.
On May 14, 2013, at 253PM, Rafał Krupiński wrote:
> On 14.05.2013 20:30, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>>> I want to install River in my maven repo; the easiest way for me is to checkout the tag from svn and use your groovy script.
>>
>> We are trying to get this version of River deployed to central. If you can hold on a bit could save you some effort. I just downloaded the release and ran install_river.groovy. There are
> 2 issues I just found in the script.
>
> [...]
>
>> HTH
>
> Did you mean deploy_river.groovy? I don't see install* anywhere.
Oops, my bad. I was looking at a local copy I had created for myself, I forgot to add it to the directory. I'll send it to you directly.
Dennis
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Rafał Krupiński <ra...@sorcersoft.com>.
On 14.05.2013 20:30, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>> I want to install River in my maven repo; the easiest way for me is to checkout the tag from svn and use your groovy script.
>
> We are trying to get this version of River deployed to central. If you can hold on a bit could save you some effort. I just downloaded the release and ran install_river.groovy. There are
2 issues I just found in the script.
[...]
> HTH
Did you mean deploy_river.groovy? I don't see install* anywhere.
--
Pozdrawiam
Rafał Krupiński
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Dennis Reedy <de...@gmail.com>.
On May 14, 2013, at 216PM, Rafał Krupiński wrote:
> On 14.05.2013 20:01, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>>
>> On May 14, 2013, at 650AM, Rafał Krupiński wrote:
>>
>>> On 13.05.2013 19:36, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>>>> Rafal,
>>>>
>>>> I have not seen any source code in the 2.2 branch that uses the packages you are referring to. Are you looking at trunk?
>>>
>>> Of course, Dennis. Why would I look anywhere else?
>>
>> It was a simple question, no reason to get snarky.
>
> You're right, sorry.
>
>>> I'll start using 2.2 branch. Thanks.
>>
>> Or head directly to the release
>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/river/river-2.2.1/
>
> I want to install River in my maven repo; the easiest way for me is to checkout the tag from svn and use your groovy script.
We are trying to get this version of River deployed to central. If you can hold on a bit could save you some effort. I just downloaded the release and ran install_river.groovy. There are 2 issues I just found in the script.
Line #4, change
String rootDir = "../.."
to
String rootDir = "../lib"
Line #33, change
"-DpomFile=poms/${aId}.pom"
to
"-DpomFile=${aId}.pom"
With those fixes you can deploy to your local repo
HTH
Dennis
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Rafał Krupiński <ra...@sorcersoft.com>.
On 14.05.2013 20:01, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>
> On May 14, 2013, at 650AM, Rafał Krupiński wrote:
>
>> On 13.05.2013 19:36, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>>> Rafal,
>>>
>>> I have not seen any source code in the 2.2 branch that uses the packages you are referring to. Are you looking at trunk?
>>
>> Of course, Dennis. Why would I look anywhere else?
>
> It was a simple question, no reason to get snarky.
You're right, sorry.
>> I'll start using 2.2 branch. Thanks.
>
> Or head directly to the release
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/river/river-2.2.1/
I want to install River in my maven repo; the easiest way for me is to
checkout the tag from svn and use your groovy script.
Regards.
--
Pozdrawiam
Rafał Krupiński
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Dennis Reedy <de...@gmail.com>.
On May 14, 2013, at 650AM, Rafał Krupiński wrote:
> On 13.05.2013 19:36, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>> Rafal,
>>
>> I have not seen any source code in the 2.2 branch that uses the packages you are referring to. Are you looking at trunk?
>
> Of course, Dennis. Why would I look anywhere else?
It was a simple question, no reason to get snarky.
>
> http://river.apache.org/source-code.html
>
> I'll start using 2.2 branch. Thanks.
Or head directly to the release
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/river/river-2.2.1/
Dennis
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Rafał Krupiński <ra...@sorcersoft.com>.
On 13.05.2013 19:36, Dennis Reedy wrote:
> Rafal,
>
> I have not seen any source code in the 2.2 branch that uses the packages you are referring to. Are you looking at trunk?
Of course, Dennis. Why would I look anywhere else?
http://river.apache.org/source-code.html
I'll start using 2.2 branch. Thanks.
--
Pozdrawiam
Rafał Krupiński
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Dennis Reedy <de...@gmail.com>.
Rafal,
I have not seen any source code in the 2.2 branch that uses the packages you are referring to. Are you looking at trunk?
Dennis
On May 13, 2013, at 1250PM, Rafał Krupiński wrote:
> On 06.05.2013 21:14, Greg Trasuk wrote:
>>
>> Hi all:
>>
>> I'm going through the "project poms" that Dennis contributed in
>> preparation for spinning the 2.2.1 release to the Apache Maven
>> repository (and hence to Central), and I have a few questions...
>
> Hi
> I have an issue on the Maven poms.
>
> River uses reference-collections (au.net.zeus.collection), and I coudn't find it on maven central, nor I could find any reference to it in the River poms.
>
> AFAIK the Central's policy is that all open source projects have to be resolvable from the Central, and closed source project must have stub pom with download URL.
> The only place I could find this library is River's dep-libs (fortunately with sources).
>
> There is no external dependency referenced in the poms, but reference-collections is the only one I couldn't find on the Internet.
>
> Regards
> --
> Pozdrawiam
> Rafał Krupiński
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Rafał Krupiński <ra...@sorcersoft.com>.
On 13.05.2013 20:02, Peter wrote:
> Thanks for the reminder I'll get it uploaded before River 2.3.0 is released.
>
> The library can be found at http://sourceforge.net/projects/custard-apple/?source=directory
>
> River 2.2.1, our most recent release, doesn't depend on the library.
Actually, I haven't found any imports other than org.apache.river,
net.jini or com.sun.jini in the 2.2 branch. dep-libs also disappeared
from the project. Does River currently depend on any external libraries?
Regards
--
Pozdrawiam
Rafał Krupiński
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Peter <ji...@zeus.net.au>.
Thanks for the reminder I'll get it uploaded before River 2.3.0 is released.
The library can be found at http://sourceforge.net/projects/custard-apple/?source=directory
River 2.2.1, our most recent release, doesn't depend on the library.
Regards,
Peter.
----- Original message -----
> On 06.05.2013 21:14, Greg Trasuk wrote:
> >
> > Hi all:
> >
> > I'm going through the "project poms" that Dennis contributed in
> > preparation for spinning the 2.2.1 release to the Apache Maven
> > repository (and hence to Central), and I have a few questions...
>
> Hi
> I have an issue on the Maven poms.
>
> River uses reference-collections (au.net.zeus.collection), and I coudn't
> find it on maven central, nor I could find any reference to it in the
> River poms.
>
> AFAIK the Central's policy is that all open source projects have to be
> resolvable from the Central, and closed source project must have stub
> pom with download URL.
> The only place I could find this library is River's dep-libs
> (fortunately with sources).
>
> There is no external dependency referenced in the poms, but
> reference-collections is the only one I couldn't find on the Internet.
>
> Regards
> --
> Pozdrawiam
> Rafał Krupiński
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Rafał Krupiński <ra...@sorcersoft.com>.
On 06.05.2013 21:14, Greg Trasuk wrote:
>
> Hi all:
>
> I'm going through the "project poms" that Dennis contributed in
> preparation for spinning the 2.2.1 release to the Apache Maven
> repository (and hence to Central), and I have a few questions...
Hi
I have an issue on the Maven poms.
River uses reference-collections (au.net.zeus.collection), and I coudn't
find it on maven central, nor I could find any reference to it in the
River poms.
AFAIK the Central's policy is that all open source projects have to be
resolvable from the Central, and closed source project must have stub
pom with download URL.
The only place I could find this library is River's dep-libs
(fortunately with sources).
There is no external dependency referenced in the poms, but
reference-collections is the only one I couldn't find on the Internet.
Regards
--
Pozdrawiam
Rafał Krupiński
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Greg Trasuk <tr...@stratuscom.com>.
Thanks Dennis. I'm going to have a go at it, starting from your script,
and if I hit a wall I'll give you a shout.
Cheers,
Greg.
On Mon, 2013-05-06 at 15:31, Dennis Reedy wrote:
> On May 6, 2013, at 314PM, Greg Trasuk wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi all:
> >
> > I'm going through the "project poms" that Dennis contributed in
> > preparation for spinning the 2.2.1 release to the Apache Maven
> > repository (and hence to Central), and I have a few questions...
> >
> > Should the poms call out a parent pom that specifies the version and all
> > the licensing? Right now they're independent. There's actually an
> > official Apache parent pom available, but since we don't build using
> > Maven, I don't think we need to call out the Apache parent.
>
> They could, but since these are being treated as 3rd party jars (i.e not created as artifacts from a Maven project) it really doesnt make sense IMO.
>
> >
> >> From what I read on the rules for submission to Maven Central, we need
> > to provide javadoc- and source- jars for all the artifacts. In the case
> > of River this works out a little funny because we generate many jars
> > (services and downloads) from the same codebase. It appears that we'd
> > be fine with providing "fake" javadoc and source jars that contain a
> > README file that points to the real sources and javadocs. Any feelings
> > about whether we need to do this, or should we?
>
> If we ever switch to a Maven project, it is an easy thing to add. IMO I dont think we need this right now.
>
> >
> > The group-id is currently "net.jini" in the poms. I don't know if INFRA
> > will give us grief over not using an "org.apache" group id (maybe
> > someone already asked them?).
>
> I already asked them, we're good to go.
>
> > Should these be "org.apache.river"?
> >
> > Lastly, I'm fairly convinced that since the Maven artifacts will be
> > separate, signed release artifacts, that we will need to call a release
> > vote on those artifacts after staging them to Apache's Nexus
> > repository. That doesn't mean they are "2.2.2", but we need to approve
> > the artifacts. Does anyone feel otherwise?
>
> I think we should stick with 2.2.1, but yes we should approve them.
>
> Note, we will most likely need to change the deploy script to use the GPG plugin instead of the deploy plugin. Let me know if you need a hand
>
> Regards
>
> Dennis
Re: Questions on the Maven poms...
Posted by Dennis Reedy <de...@gmail.com>.
On May 6, 2013, at 314PM, Greg Trasuk wrote:
>
> Hi all:
>
> I'm going through the "project poms" that Dennis contributed in
> preparation for spinning the 2.2.1 release to the Apache Maven
> repository (and hence to Central), and I have a few questions...
>
> Should the poms call out a parent pom that specifies the version and all
> the licensing? Right now they're independent. There's actually an
> official Apache parent pom available, but since we don't build using
> Maven, I don't think we need to call out the Apache parent.
They could, but since these are being treated as 3rd party jars (i.e not created as artifacts from a Maven project) it really doesnt make sense IMO.
>
>> From what I read on the rules for submission to Maven Central, we need
> to provide javadoc- and source- jars for all the artifacts. In the case
> of River this works out a little funny because we generate many jars
> (services and downloads) from the same codebase. It appears that we'd
> be fine with providing "fake" javadoc and source jars that contain a
> README file that points to the real sources and javadocs. Any feelings
> about whether we need to do this, or should we?
If we ever switch to a Maven project, it is an easy thing to add. IMO I dont think we need this right now.
>
> The group-id is currently "net.jini" in the poms. I don't know if INFRA
> will give us grief over not using an "org.apache" group id (maybe
> someone already asked them?).
I already asked them, we're good to go.
> Should these be "org.apache.river"?
>
> Lastly, I'm fairly convinced that since the Maven artifacts will be
> separate, signed release artifacts, that we will need to call a release
> vote on those artifacts after staging them to Apache's Nexus
> repository. That doesn't mean they are "2.2.2", but we need to approve
> the artifacts. Does anyone feel otherwise?
I think we should stick with 2.2.1, but yes we should approve them.
Note, we will most likely need to change the deploy script to use the GPG plugin instead of the deploy plugin. Let me know if you need a hand
Regards
Dennis