Hi, On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Gabriele Columbro <[email protected]> wrote: > I added opencmis-* in version names, as I suppose other chemistry > hosted projects will follow different release schedule and version > scheme.
An alternative is to create new Jira projects like CMISPHP for codebases that follow a separate release schedule. Many of the Jira reports assume that a single Jira project maps to a single release schedule. > Do you think is there any specific issue should include/fix it in > 0.1.0 or shall we just reschedule them it to the version that looks > more reasonable? The already resolved issues that affect the OpenCMIS codebase should probably be marked as resolved for 0.1.0. This will make the Jira release reports more effective. I'd leave unresolved issues unscheduled unless they're explicitly being targeted for a specific release. > - I'm also trying to understand what would be the best / easy / reproducible > way to integrate our release process with the standard maven based projects > staging [3], in a way that in the same process we could distribute the > aggregated artifacts [4] via standard www.apache.org/dist and the single > JARs (useful to to application builders) via the standard maven staging > process. In Jackrabbit we use an assembly and some custom Ant tasks to stage the release artifacts targeted for www.apache.org/dist. See the apache-release profile settings in the Jackrabbit reactor POM [1]. [1] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jackrabbit/trunk/pom.xml BR, Jukka Zitting
