It's funny that you cite "no time" and use the equivalent of 299.5 6 digit revision numbers to send us an email on your lack of time. You could have done 299 releases to Sebb's quite reasonable standards with that much keyboard activity. Point made? :-p
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 1:14 AM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote: > On 15 August 2013 18:50, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@scalaris.com> > wrote: > > Hi Oliver, > > > > Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > >> On 15 August 2013 08:53, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On 14 August 2013 21:21, Dennis Lundberg <denn...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 10:47 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On 13 August 2013 18:58, Dennis Lundberg <denn...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>>> > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 12:30 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> >> On 12 August 2013 20:10, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote: > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> I have now read the threads that are referring to, and have not > >>>>> >>>>> found a single link to any ASF rule stating that we need to > >>>>> >>>>> include these things in a VOTE thread. > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> >>>> So how do you propose that reviewers check the provenance of the > >>>>> >>>> files in the source release? > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> >>> Are you looking for files that are in a distribution that didn't > >>>>> >>> come > >>>>> from source control? Everything else as far as provenance goes is > >>>>> covered. Errant content is a potential problem, but everything in a > >>>>> distribution should come from source control which no one has access > to > >>>>> until they have a signed CLA on file. > >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> Yes. That is where the whole saga started. > >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> Proving provenance is why the SCM coordinates are needed for the > >>>>> >> vote. > >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> The SCM details may also be useful to discover files accidentally > >>>>> >> omitted from the source archive. > >>>>> > > >>>>> > You want to compare the contents of the *-source-release.zip with > >>>>> > something from SCM, to make nothing bad has crept into the source > >>>>> > bundle. So you need to know where in SCM you can find it. Have I > >>>>> > understood you correctly? > >>>>> > >>>>> It's vital to be able to link the files in the source release > >>>>> archive(s) to their origin in SCM. > >>>>> > >>>>> The provenance of any source files the ASF releases must be clearly > >>>>> traceable. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> This information is clearly traceable and available to anyone who > wants > >>>> to review a release made by the Maven project. Our process uses the > >>>> Release Plugin, which will put the POM from the SCM tag in the staging > >>>> directory along with the source-release.zip. In that POM wou will find > >>>> the URL to the original sources in SCM. > >>>> > >>> > >>> As has already been pointed out, SVN tags are not immutable, so the > >>> tag name alone is not sufficient. > >> > >> I think Stephen perfectly sum up the situation. > >> If you're not happy follow that. > >> > >> But please STOP the troll! > > > > The Maven PMC has made clear, that it knows about the problems and want > to > > ignore it. However, please understand that Sebb is playing devil's > advocate > > here, because the same release process is used for other Apache projects > > where the PMCs will *not* ignore this flaws. Sebb is more or less > pestering > > you, because he is tired of having the same discussions in projects > where he > > *is* PMC and is therefore responsible for the release. So, it is a bit > short > > sighted to declare him as troll, simply because you (the Maven PMC) > decided > > to ignore the problem. > > I declared the thread as a troll not someone and BTW I'm not english > native speaker so the troll word is not so rude for me :-) > If it was read as something rude and a sort of personal attack so I > apologize. > > I'm just tired by all of those threads. > As described by Stephen we provide what ASF rules need. > Perso I'm a volunteer here and I spend my spare time on writing code > here to help our users. > So my time here is limited and I prefer coding rather than waste my > time on non needed procedure steps. > So if someone want to add extra/over prodecure steps why not but in > these case tools must be provided to ease our life. > I'm a developer and yes maybe I tend to be lazy so I prefer > using/writing tools to avoid manual tasks :-). > > That won't be too complicated as the src tarball contains the pom with > scm information. > But perso no time for that so I prefer to not feed troll when I don't > have time to REALLY do the job. > > But tired of that and why? > Because I heard/read so many people complaining about ASF too much > bureaucratic and not a place for innovations...... > Those threads are the perfect examples of that!! > I just don't want to go in a too many procedures model as I can see in > some projects (again especially when it's not needed) > At the end the only result is: folks are just scared about releasing > because it's too complicated and on vote thread they only receive > comments on missing comma in a text file and/or non needed > blank/spurious line in an other line but usually nothing saying: "hey > the new feature you added is very cool". > So at the end no one release something and the project is dead (as > users go somewhere else whey they got fixes for their issues or new > features). > And I certainly don't want to see our Maven project go in that way. > > My 0.02AUD > > /me go back to write code > > > > > - Jörg > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > -- > Olivier Lamy > Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
