I'm not willing to do anything on any hill here either and I'd rather gel with the team consensus, I've said my bits ;-)
Gary On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 4:10 PM Volkan Yazıcı <vol...@yazi.ci> wrote: > > Email archives are irrelevant for the provenance of sources; an arbitrary > tag/commit not sealed with `rel/` prefix might disappear and we will lose > the context to "what was proposed/rejected for release" . > > We don't have hundreds of releases with dozens of RCs for each. I would > rather see my `git tag -l` neatly output > > rel/0.1.0 > rel/0.1.0-rc1 > rel/0.2.0 > rel/0.2.0-rc1 > rel/0.3.0 > rel/0.3.0-rc1 > > rather than > > rel/0.1.0 > rel/0.2.0 > rel/0.3.0 > prefix-for-tag-nobody-cares-0.1.0-rc1 > prefix-for-tag-nobody-cares-0.2.0-rc1 > prefix-for-tag-nobody-cares-0.3.0-rc1 > > RCs are subject to provenance, IMO. > Wanted to share my 2 cents. > This is not a mountain I am willing to die on. > > On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:40 PM Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > What you are proposing IMO is confusing and clutters up the release tag > > space: "rel" stands for "releases", not for "candidates for releases that > > may be completely broken" :-( > > > > It is of zero use to downstream users, and it is only being proposed out of > > the convenience because some tool does it, not because it's correct and > > best thing to do. We know what the candidates are already based on the tags > > in the emails which are forever archived. > > > > Gary > > > > On Tue, May 2, 2023, 15:03 Volkan Yazıcı <vol...@yazi.ci> wrote: > > > > > I support the idea of using `rel/`-prefixed tags both for releases and > > RCs > > > (release candidates). It matters for provenance, which is of subject for > > > RCs too, in particular, the downvoted ones. Next to that, it is > > intuitive, > > > one doesn't need to remember two different patterns to access releases > > and > > > RCs. Last but not least, these tags are created by CI, hence effortless > > > from an RMs pov. > > > > > > On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 12:09 AM Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > 1. As noted below you tagged with red/0.1.0-rc2. You really shouldn’t > > be > > > > using rel/ as a tag for candidates. Instead use something like > > > > tools-1.0-rc2. rel tags are treated special by Infra and are meant for > > > > ONLY the “real” release tags (in this case 1.0). > > > > > > > > 2. I checked out the tag and ran the build but it seems to hang at > > > > > > > > [INFO] --- maven-invoker-plugin:3.5.1:integration-test (default) @ > > > > log4j-transform-maven-plugin --- > > > > [INFO] Building: location/pom.xml > > > > > > > > I ended up killing it after 5 minutes. > > > > > > > > Ralph > > > > > > > > > On May 1, 2023, at 12:09 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz < > > piotr.karw...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The Apache Log4j Transformation Tools 0.1.0 release is now available > > > for > > > > voting. > > > > > > > > > > This is the first release and it contains two modules: > > > > > > > > > > * [LOG4J2-3638]: Adds a bytecode transformation tool to provide > > > > > location information without reflection. > > > > > * [LOG4J2-673]: Adds a resource transformer for the Maven Shade > > Plugin > > > > > to merge `Log4j2Plugins.dat` plugin caches. Thanks to Eduard > > > > > Gizatullin. > > > > > > > > > > Source repository: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j-transform > > > > > Tag: rel/0.1.0-rc2 > > > > > Commit: 7bb767c1466cd9faebfeeffa8136b231bf2b6fae > > > > > Artifacts: > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/logging/log4j-transform/0.1.0 > > > > > Nexus repository: > > > > > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachelogging-1104 > > > > > CI job run: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j-transform/actions/runs/4853722893 > > > > > Signing key: > > > > > > > > > https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?search=077e8893a6dcc33dd4a4d5b256e73ba9a0b592d0&fingerprint=on&op=index > > > > > > > > > > Please download, test, and cast your votes on the Log4j developers > > > list. > > > > > > > > > > [ ] +1, release the artifacts > > > > > [ ] -1, don't release, because... > > > > > > > > > > The vote will remain open for 72 hours All votes are welcome and we > > > > > encourage everyone to test the release, but only the Logging Services > > > > > PMC votes are officially counted. At least 3 +1 votes and more > > > > > positive than negative votes are required. > > > > > > > > > > Countdown: > > > > > > > > > https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/launch?iso=20230504T2115&p0=4162&font=cursive > > > > > > > > > > Piotr > > > > > > > > > > > > >