Ran, I previously sent this email [1] on a recommended approach for creating a source release. Let me know if that helps. Since I didn't see any questions, I had assumed that it made sense.
I would label what you have proposed here as the pypi package, which would be good for review as well. I'm traveling the next few days (US holiday) so my responses may be delayed. John [1]: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/59e8102457c1a1b49c435e714c39780dc728d7f74da2021ddd5c8281@%3Cdev.ariatosca.apache.org%3E On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 12:28 PM Ran Ziv <r...@gigaspaces.com> wrote: > The vote is cancelled in light of a "-1" vote. > I'll fix the mentioned issues next week and raise another vote. > > I could still use some clarification with regards to what constitutes a > "source distribution" for this matter. > > Thanks, > Ran > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 7:08 PM, Ran Ziv <r...@gigaspaces.com> wrote: > > > Right, I'll need to look more into RAT before creating another RC package > > then. > > > > > > Re source release - so should it contain exactly everything that's in the > > repository? This is somewhat different from the Python concept of a > source > > distribution. > > Does it mean the generated doc files can't be there (since they're not in > > the repo)? > > Should files like "MANIFEST.IN" which gets compiled when creating a > > source distribution appear in the source release? > > Do all the tests and CI-related configurations need to appear in the > > source release as well? > > > > > > If that's what's needed I can just tar the repository itself I guess. > > Setting aside the canonical distribution for a moment, would it be ok for > > the source distribution on PyPI to be of the format that I'm using > > currently rather than the one you're describing now? > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 7:00 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 11:53 AM Ran Ziv <r...@gigaspaces.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Suneel, re mentioning 72 hours - note that I simply used the > recommended > >> > template for these messages from here: > >> > > >> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-stdcxx-de > >> v/200601.mbox/%3c43c1c0a0.7040...@roguewave.com%3E > >> > > >> > > >> I'll note this is an email from 10 years ago, and things have been > refined > >> since then. I plan to rewrite that guide to give better examples. > Here's > >> a more up to date example > >> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9fd77b14753bbde462bea06 > >> fc2e1c03d5cf5a89cea2fabd6751d805a@%3Cdev.ponymail.apache.org%3E > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > John: > >> > Are you reading this off the README? If so, you'll notice that the > >> > installation section mentions that when installing ARIA from source, > the > >> > command that should be executed is actually "pip install ." when > you're > >> > inside the extracted dir. > >> > > >> > Regarding your other comments: > >> > - DISCLAIMER file - apparently it was dropped from the manifest file > >> > somehow, i'll add it back. > >> > - Is RAT to be used for Python projects as well? I thought it was > >> > Java-specific and I'm not familiar with similar tools for Python. > We've > >> > done what we can to verify every code file has the license header. > >> > > >> > >> RAT is a tool written in java that checks headers in all languages. We > >> should have instructions on how to run it here. > >> > >> > >> > - This is indeed the source release - There are indeed deltas between > >> this > >> > and the repo files but that's because some files are unnecessary for > >> users > >> > (e.g. docs generating files) while some aren't needed in the repo > (e.g. > >> > docs generated files). > >> > > >> > > >> The source release is what's in your repo. Source releases are for > >> everyone to consume. > >> > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > Ran > >> > > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 6:43 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > -1. Found the following issues: > >> > > > >> > > - BUILD instructions are INSTALL instructions, and the installation > >> > doesn't > >> > > work > >> > > > >> > > pip install apache-ariatosca > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Collecting apache-ariatosca > >> > > Could not find a version that satisfies the requirement > >> > apache-ariatosca > >> > > (from versions: ) > >> > > No matching distribution found for apache-ariatosca > >> > > > >> > > - There is no DISCLAIMER file > >> > > - No instructions on how to run RAT > >> > > - I'm not sure this is a source release, many files don't match > whats > >> in > >> > > the repo (files added/missing?) > >> > > > >> > > Other things look fine: > >> > > - contains incubating > >> > > - files contain headers > >> > > > >> > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 11:26 AM Ran Ziv <r...@gigaspaces.com> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > I created a tarball candidate for the 0.1.0 release and placed it > in > >> > > ARIA's > >> > > > /dist/dev folder: > >> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ariatosca/ > >> > > > The file is signed (.asc) and its MD5 / SHA512 checksums may be > >> found > >> > in > >> > > > that folder as well. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > The list of issues Resolved for this release are simply all the > >> issues > >> > > that > >> > > > have been resolved thus far, seeing as this would be the first > >> release > >> > :) > >> > > > Those can be found here: > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARIA-295?filter=- > >> > > > 1&jql=project%3Dariatosca%20and%20status%20in%20(resolved% > >> 2C%20closed) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Instructions for installation etc. may be found in the README file > >> > inside > >> > > > the tarball. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Please vote to publish this tarball on ARIA's /dist/release > folder. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Ran > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
