On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 17-Jul-08, at 11:12 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote: > > I gather this is the reason that the commits (r677787 to r677789) for >> the Maven Artifact release that Oleg just called a vote on look like >> they were done by Jason? >> >> I'm really not comfortable with svn credentials being shared like that. >> >> > They are not being shared. Hudson is running as a sand-boxed user where I > have setup my credentials, so that the releases can be fully automated where > the same set of attributes are used across the board. I tested my > credentials, they work. The release plugin is not very graceful when things > at the SVN bork. I was striving for a QA'd process so I took into account > everything. The machine is secure and the account is secure. So now that you > know that do you still think it's a problem? > > FWIW, Continuum lets you enter your svn credentials when you do a >> release, and uses those for the related commits. >> >> > It's not relevant to me what Continuum can or cannot do at this point. The > community took a severe hit and Hudson has way more active developers and > it's easier to develop features because it has an extensible API. You can > look at the charts. The core group for Continuum consists of one person: > "olamy". Contrast that with the core group in Hudson which is at least 10 > people. Not totally right because we changed the svn repo. Old values are there : http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?path=%2Fmaven%2Fcontinuum As you can see, Continuum doesn't have only one developer. You are active on continuum like the majority of Hudson developers and the core group in Hudson is one developer too. Just my 2 cents for some values that are totally out of topic!!! Emmanuel > > http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?path=%2Fcontinuum > > http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/HUDSON/search > > So it's nice to say Continuum has this or that, but who's going to fix it? > Kohsuke and company push out releases super frequently and sometimes even > every week. There's just no comparison in my mind. I have limited time I > simply can't afford to invest anything in Continuum. So for one feature > Continuum might have I think what I have setup with the sandboxed Hudson > user is a reasonable compromise. As a policy we can decide as a PMC what's > acceptable but the setup I have is secure as far as I'm concerned. > > Also I've had 7 people actually take the Hudson bundle and run the Maven > 2.1 ITs. That's never happened before and it's because Hudson is so easy to > make a bundle, unpack it with the Maven jobs and boom you have a fully > functional Maven environment. > > -- >> Wendy >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 8:47 AM, John Casey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> The rest of this release infrastructure has simply been configuration of >>> hudson and nexus - nexus, to provide a staging ground for releases - to >>> configure release jobs that deploy to this staging location instead of >>> the >>> real release repository...just generalizing on configuration that we all >>> have in our personal settings.xml files by now. Jason's credentials are >>> used >>> for SVN and SSH where necessary, and I've created a new GPG key for use >>> in >>> this CI system, then signed it with my own key. That key ID is: >>> 84B54612. >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > Thanks, > > Jason > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Jason van Zyl > Founder, Apache Maven > jason at sonatype dot com > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > People develop abstractions by generalizing from concrete examples. > Every attempt to determine the correct abstraction on paper without > actually developing a running system is doomed to failure. No one > is that smart. A framework is a resuable design, so you develop it by > looking at the things it is supposed to be a design of. The more examples > you look at, the more general your framework will be. > > -- Ralph Johnson & Don Roberts, Patterns for Evolving Frameworks > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
