So moving forward is reproducibility of our milestone builds always
going to be an issue? I think this is pretty ridiculous that this is
such a painful process and I understand Matt's frustration.
Does any one know if Maven is using us as a case-study and working
toward addressing some of our major concerns? If not, do we look
toward another build solution in the future?
-sachin
On Apr 4, 2007, at 11:33 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
Here's my 0.02 c.
The process is owrking well as (I think it was Rakesh) that
identified something odd about the binaries. We should not have
both artifacts (2.0-M4 and 2.0-M4-SNAPSHOT) in the binaries.
As release manager I am not comfortable releasing these and I'm
concerned about where they got picked up and will investigate this.
I will work today to spin up a corrected set of binaries that
addresses the issues we've been discussing (buildability, etc.)
I have to say that every release is a learning experience. So, for
my part doing this once a month has been useful as it flushes out a
new set of issues. Geronimo is so dependent on external projects
that we are in a unique (and difficult) position from a release
standpoint as our dependent projects do not release in a
coordinated fashion.
I have a check list of how to build and am augmenting it with a
list of things to look for...something new every time :)
