Looks good... I will merge the changes...
just one [funny] thing about my original script: this print here: echo $theFile It was a debug statement that I forgot to remove it... I will remove it from the artemis prepare one. And also, should I keep the download-release.sh on the scripts or should it go? On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote: > I've raised https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1437 with a > patch for the website around fixing this and some other issues, plus > splitting the older releases out to their own page, if folks could > take a look and see what they think. > > Robbie > > On 18 September 2017 at 16:58, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> > wrote: >> The links for some of the older 1.5.x releases on the site seem to be >> broken also, still pointing to the main dist release or mirrors rather >> than the archive where the files are now. >> >> The download page should also be linking to the checksums, but >> currently only links to the signatures. >> >> On 18 September 2017 at 16:42, Timothy Bish <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 09/18/2017 11:35 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote: >>>> >>>> Talking about releases... I know there's a policy to archive >>>> releases... Tim Bish had once archived a couple of ActiveMQ >>>> releases... >>>> >>>> >>>> It's time to archive a few in Artemis now. (...will look for docs) >>>> >>>> >>>> I could do it next week.. unless someone do it before me. (I'm not >>>> really working this week) >>> >>> >>> You should be archiving the previous release on each new release. Archiving >>> is done by removing the release from dist.apache.org and updating the >>> website download links for that release to point to archive.apache.org >>> >>> The current dist site appears to not have been cleaned up, so you need to >>> remove 1.5.4, 2.0.0, 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 and update your download links to be in >>> compliance with Apache processes. >>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Robbie Gemmell >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Yep. I'm not sure exactly how much longer than this it has been the >>>>> recommendation, but after noticing we started swapping each component >>>>> at Qpid over to using SHA512 checksums in March as they each get >>>>> released. Most have changed over now, though still a couple final less >>>>> frequently released bits left to go. >>>>> >>>>> If people are concerned at dropping the SHA1 outright we could always >>>>> have both, perhaps for a time as a form of switchover period. I don't >>>>> personally think thats really necessary. >>>>> >>>>> Robbie >>>>> >>>>> On 15 September 2017 at 21:18, Timothy Bish <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 09/15/2017 03:59 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just for my education. Why you Decided to drop downloading the .sha1 >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> are creating a new one? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All the other downloads we have are using the .sha1? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Tim Bish >>> twitter: @tabish121 >>> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ >>> -- Clebert Suconic
