On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:29 AM, Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Hi Emmanuel, > > On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> Last minutes changes are always bad, but this is something we have to deal >> with... > > > Yeah of course... > > >> Can I suggest that before entering in release mode, we do a code freeze >> just before ? As we have a 72 hours period between the vote and the real >> release, the code freeze period would be used to avoid some last minute >> changes during the release. > > > Yeah, sounds great. Maybe we could create candidate branches, so we can > continue to work on the trunk during those 72 hours. If something is wrong > for the release, we can fix in these candidate branches. > > >> Also, I would say that the release manager will always be blamed for what >> he breaks, but he is not responsible, as he is just the guy who paint the >> house, and notice the cracks in the wall... > > > Yeah, it's true and I was absolutely not blaming Alex. ;) > No no I FU here and should have left things as is. I noticed the artifactId and module name discrepancy. But we can retag and regenerate the installers and push them out again. > > I know very well, how hard it is to cut a release... :D > (Especially when maven plugins try to prevent you from releasing) > Not that bad I'm just a retard these days. > > BTW, I checked out the code and fixed it, so the installers are working > fine now. > > Here's what's working and has been tested so far: > - Windows installer > - Mac OS X installer > - Solaris (x86 and sparc) installers > - Archive (zip and tar.gz) installers (on Unix and Windows) > > Here's what's need to be tested: > - Binary installers > - Debian installers > - RPM installers > I'll check these out. Did you deploy these to the dist area? Remember we'd have to resign them. Thanks, Alex
