On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Stephen Connolly
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I take the simple view that if it ends up in
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/releases/ then it
> is a release therefore the release voting rules apply... But I am
> willing to accept if the majority want to put a different criteria on
> what constitutes a release

I understand that this is how we got here. I'm offering up a proposal
to tamper with this. A related scheme: lazy consensus push, and then a
vote on the POM release, leaving a brief window of exposure.

>
> On 17 August 2011 12:55, Stephen Connolly
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> That assumes that nobody outside of Apache inherits from these shared poms...
>>
>> A scary assumption to make IMHO
>>
>> On 17 August 2011 12:50, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> This tees off of a remark in the recent vote thread about the
>>> disruption to CI of pom releases.
>>>
>>> I don't believe that we need the full ASF release voting process for
>>> our internal shared POMs.
>>>
>>> I reason as follows:
>>>
>>> The Apache release process creates a particular legal status for a
>>> body of code. This has certain advantages for users and developers.
>>>
>>> However, that assumes that there are users! However, these POMs are
>>> not intended for use by anything except other pieces of Maven (the
>>> global ASF pom might be an exception). Thus, they should be viewed as
>>> part of the releases of Maven itself and the components and plugins,
>>> not as independent releases.
>>>
>>> To build any of our user-visible components from source, you need to
>>> use the right parent POM (give our take our friend at Gentoo).
>>> Arguably, what we need here is a tweak to the source plugin, or some
>>> other plugin, that could sweep the chain of parents into 'the
>>> release', or at least enumerate them. We could then argue that,
>>> maven-release-plugin aside, the shared poms are formally 'released'
>>> when the components that use them are releases.
>>>
>>> If this argument holds water, the shared poms could be pushed via the
>>> maven-release-plugin via lazy consensus, and the CI problems go away.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to