Kristian Waagan wrote:
On 19.10.10 17:41, Rick Hillegas wrote:
Kristian Waagan wrote:
On 19.10.10 14:52, Rick Hillegas wrote:
[ snip ]
Hi Rick,
I agree Maven can be seen as just another distribution channel.
If anyone has a suggestion for some text for the release
distributions page, that would be great!
Hi Kristian,
I would keep this simple. At the end of the Distributions section of
the release download page, we can just have a one line reference:
"Maven repository for 10.6.2.1: https://blah/blah/blah";
Can we simply add a header "Deprecated Maven Artifacts"?
Don't see much reason to advertise the deprecated artifacts. I
can't think of any reason that a user would need to know about any
distribution channels other than the ones which we approve.
We want to "advertise" the deprecated artifacts for the same reason
as we are advertising the deprecated Derby versions: we don't want
users to use them - either because they simply don't work or because
they contain severe bugs. The other reason is that we cannot remove
the artifacts once they have been published (do we need better
testing before deployment?).
There are two different scenarios:
a) Derby version deprecated implies that the corresponding Maven
artifacts are deprecated as well.
b) Broken Maven artifacts doesn't imply that the Derby version is
deprecated.
I think we already cover (a) implicitly under "Deprecated Releases".
We are discussing a home for (b).
On the other side, now that the Maven scripts we use seem to have
stabilized, maybe we can just kill off this discussion right away,
in the hope that we won't produce any more broken artifacts?
+1 to killing off this discussion. I'm not planning to make this
mistake again.
Since there doesn't seem to be a consensus on whether there is a need
to improve the documentation of our Maven artifacts or not, I will put
this on hold for now.
We can continue the discussion if we get more complaints from users at
some point.
There is one thing I'd like to nail down though, and that is what the
development community wants regarding the history section in
maven2/README.txt. My motivation for this is that the current
instructions are inaccurate and may cause a little extra hassle for
the release manager.
Based on the discussion we have had in this thread, I propose two
options:
a) update the version living on trunk, regardless of release branch
b) remove it - leave no traces in the code repository of Maven
artifact deployment, we will have to consult the Apache staging
repository or the central Maven repository [1] to figure out what has
been published
Since I have been working a little with the Maven stuff, I'm
comfortable with option (b). This will remove one small task for the
release manager, so I'm giving it my +1.
+1 to reducing the complexity of our release process.
Thanks,
-Rick
Regards,
