If the version number is an issue and we'd prefer a different module name
with a version 1.0, then everything changes quite a bit. If we want to use
a smaller version number as the initial release, that's a lot simpler.

On 16 July 2017 at 18:34, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:

> A bit like Java 9 when you think of it. ;)
>
> I'm not sure why they used an artefact naming scheme rather than use
> classifiers or something more sensible, but then again, I'm not sure if Ivy
> supports that as it is (it seems as though every JVM build tool other than
> Maven still uses Ivy).
>
> On 16 July 2017 at 17:07, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Ah right, since Scale is fond on breaking compatibility.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Jul 16, 2017 14:49, "Ralph Goers" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Apparently the module name has to have a Scala version number in it.
>> >
>> > Ralph
>> >
>> > > On Jul 16, 2017, at 2:41 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Like log4j-api-scala-wrapper?
>> > >
>> > > Gary
>> > >
>> > > On Jul 16, 2017 14:04, "Ralph Goers" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> To address Gary’s issues I think it would be better to use a
>> different
>> > >> module name and start from version 1.0.
>> > >>
>> > >> Ralph
>> > >>
>> > >>> On Jul 16, 2017, at 1:43 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I know... :-(
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The checksums are generated either by some Maven plugin or Nexus.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Gary
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Mikael Ståldal <[email protected]>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> The md5sum and sha1sum tools are able to do the comparations
>> themself
>> > if
>> > >>>> the checksum file contains the filename, which those checksum files
>> > >>>> doesn't. Why not?
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> We need to automate this, it's tedious and error-prone to do all
>> this
>> > >>>> checksum verification manually.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> On 2017-07-16 22:29, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Mikael Ståldal <[email protected]
>> >
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Apache Maven 3.3.9 (bb52d8502b132ec0a5a3f4c09453c07478323dc5;
>> > >>>>>> 2015-11-10T17:41:47+01:00)
>> > >>>>>> Maven home: /opt/apache-maven-3.3.9
>> > >>>>>> Java version: 1.8.0_131, vendor: Oracle Corporation
>> > >>>>>> Java home: /opt/jvm/jdk1.8.0_131/jre
>> > >>>>>> Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: UTF-8
>> > >>>>>> OS name: "linux", version: "4.4.0-83-generic", arch: "amd64",
>> > family:
>> > >>>>>> "unix"
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> I did all three actions mentions in the BUINGING.md:
>> > >>>>>> mvn apache-rat:check
>> > >>>>>> mvn clean install
>> > >>>>>> mvn site
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> on both master and the 11.0-rc2 tag in Git.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> I also tried the artifacts published to the staging repository
>> with
>> > a
>> > >>>>>> test
>> > >>>>>> project of mine.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Not sure how I am supposed to check the ASC, MD5 and SHA1 files
>> in a
>> > >>>>>> convenient way.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>> On Cygwin/Linux:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> md5sum <FILENAME>
>> > >>>>> and compare the to contents of the .md5 file
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> sha1sum <FILENAME>
>> > >>>>> and compare the to contents of the .sha1 file
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Then:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> gpg --verify <ASC_FILE> <ZIP_FILE>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> and eyeball the output.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Gary
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Do we have a checklist of what we are supposed to do?
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> On 2017-07-16 21:50, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> As a PMC, we think we need to better document our "+1"s than
>> > >> "Everything
>> > >>>>>>> seems fine."
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> For example: Did you check the ASC, MD5 and SHA1 files?
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> _How_ exactly does it "seem" fine?
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> What JDK(s) did you use to build? What did you build? From what?
>> > The
>> > >>>>>>> tag?
>> > >>>>>>> The zip?
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> And so on.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Gary
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Mikael Ståldal <
>> [email protected]
>> > >
>> > >>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> +1
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> Everything seems fine.
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> On 2017-07-16 18:41, Matt Sicker wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> Hello all, sorry for the delay between release candidates. This
>> > is a
>> > >>>>>>>> vote
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> to release RC2 of Log4j Scala API 11.0, the first release of
>> the
>> > >> new
>> > >>>>>>>>> repository. The main features in this release are Scala 2.12
>> > >> support
>> > >>>>>>>>> and
>> > >>>>>>>>> an
>> > >>>>>>>>> API for manipulating the ThreadContext.
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> Artifacts are available in this staging repository: <
>> > >>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>> > >>>>>>>>> logging-1028/
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> .
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> The site is on <https://rgoers.github.io/log4j-scala-site/>
>> > >> (though
>> > >>>>>>>>> it's
>> > >>>>>>>>> not appearing for me at the time of writing). Don't mind the
>> > >> styling
>> > >>>>>>>>> issues
>> > >>>>>>>>> in component pages as these will point to the correct paths
>> when
>> > >>>>>>>>> merged
>> > >>>>>>>>> with the existing site.
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> The artifacts are signed with my GPG key with the
>> > >>>>>>>>> ID 748F15B2CF9BA8F024155E6ED7C92B70FA1C814D which is
>> available
>> > in
>> > >> the
>> > >>>>>>>>> Logging KEYS file.
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> Artifacts can be downloaded using the following command:
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> wget -e robots=off --cut-dirs=7 -nH -r -p -np
>> > >> --no-check-certificate
>> > >>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>> > >>>>>>>>> logging-1028/org/apache/logging/log4j/
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> If that doesn't work, please let me know so I can note the
>> > correct
>> > >>>>>>>>> command
>> > >>>>>>>>> for future vote emails.
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>



-- 
Matt Sicker <[email protected]>

Reply via email to