IMO using a svn rev # for a release is a good idea, that with a tag ensures that code for that exact release can always be found at a later time.
--jason -----Original Message----- From: Matt Hogstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:10:46 To:[email protected] Subject: Re: [vote] Release geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.0 On Dec 21, 2006, at 4:06 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > I think voting on svn source for small projects / jars is good, > because people can build them locally, check that everything > is ok (for legal reasons), and vote. This is much more difficult > for Geronimo server, of course, and may not be applied. > > This works well, I think, if the release process is just > mvn release:prepare release:perform > which should be the case for all projects ideally. > The benefit is that the jars will be deployed to their final > destination > as part of the relase, without having to tweak / corrupting maven > repository metadata by copying from a staging repo. > For my part, I'd prefer to follow this approach going forward. I agree with Guillaume that it may not totally work for Geronimo unless we choose an SVN number as the release point so people can track changes to a branch. Having been through the release process a few times I think that using Maven to generate the artifacts is so much simpler and automagically updating the repo is far easier as well. I'd like to propose (in a separate thread) that we adopt this process going forward for specs. If the vote succeeds then I think David could follow it for these specs as a test case. Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
