Reinhard Poetz wrote: > David Crossley wrote: > >Reinhard Poetz wrote: > >>Please cast your votes, whether we want to publish these artifacts to the > >>official Maven repository and make the release official. The vote is open > >>for 72 hours. > > > >-1 > > > >I tried to raise these issues when Reinhard proposed the release plan. > > > >The procedure is not being followed. We need to vote on sources, > >not binaries. We also need to publish those sources as the release. > > for e.g. cocoon-core you find sources, binaries and javadocs in > http://people.apache.org/builds/cocoon/org/apache/cocoon/cocoon-core/2.2.0-M2/
Hmmm, sorry, i see them now. Not sure what i was looking at then. I am happy about the "sources" aspect now, so +1 from me. > >We also need to know which SVN revision corresponds to the release. > > These can be found in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/tags/ > > >See the last paragraph of http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what > > After reading it again, I'm not sure of what a release really is. From my > understanding everything is a release, whether it is something you call, > alpha, beta, GA or whatever. > > >I am not just being a stickler for procedure, rather that the > >PMC has responsibilities. > > What are you missing exactly? The non-missing sources. :-) > >Perhaps follow the release procedure that Carsten already has been using, > >of course with the additional maven bits. > > Again, what are you missing? Except the JIRA updates I think everything is > done to vote on the artifacts, isn't it? > > >Why is there an "-M2" in the artefact names? If it is a "release" > >and not a "milestone" then it should be named "2.2.0". > > For me both things are releases > > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what > Releases are, by definition, anything that is published beyond the group > that owns it. In our case, that means any publication outside the group of > people on the product dev list. If the general public is being instructed > to download a package, then that package has been released. Each PMC must > obey the ASF requirements on approving any release. How you label the > package is a secondary issue, described below. [...] > > but if I'm wrong with my interpreation I have not problem in saying that > the milestones are no releases in the sense of the above text. I thought that the "milestone" naming was something leading up to a release, and intended for developers. So at what point do we drop the "-M*" appendage? -David
