Well you could make the verification part of the verification ... As I mentioned ... I am suggesting to create a release with Ant OR Maven (not require both) and then make the validation part of the release verification process.
Chris Am 31.03.20, 18:23 schrieb "Alex Harui" <[email protected]>: Let me try another way: There are.a lot of build.xml files that are intended to create a tar.gz and .zip (that the Maven distribution will hopefully binary match someday if not already). How can the RM, in the creation of the release candidates, verify that the build.xml files will produce the .tar.gz and .zip so our Ant users will not run into issues with those build.xml files? The way we do it now is to run 'ant release" and actually distribute the results. What other ways are there to verify the build.xml files? -Alex On 3/31/20, 8:59 AM, "Yishay Weiss" <[email protected]> wrote: > - Some tooling could be added to validate artifacts created by any form of distribution with ones built by Ant If I understand Alex’s concern correctly he wants Ant users to see their Royale changes in any IDE. Is this tooling supposed to help with that? Am 31.03.20, 07:48 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" <[email protected]>: Hi Chris, Last comment from Alex explain exactly what release process has to do additional. - Did your document explanation included that step? Reading it I feel it includes, but I would like to make sure. Thanks, Piotr On Tue, Mar 31, 2020, 6:34 AM Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread.html%2Fr6412a8240c1b690603d2ddd12b578ddfc3dc8436c24b15174a18fe74%2540%253Cdev.royale.apache.org%253E&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C571ece52cc4f47b3f11008d7d58c6cc5%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637212671413184429&sdata=VVf5G0bB5LlWKOSGnaZhkdC4eNaaT%2FazPs5gd9mQImg%3D&reserved=0 > > A "build" (running 'ant main') produces jars and swcs but does not create > the same output as 'ant release' which produces tar.gz and .zip files. The > release artifacts are used in many IDEs and in NPM. So, IMO, in the > creating of the release artifacts, the RM should ensure that it is possible > to create the tar.gz and .zip files via Ant, and to create at minimum, the > Maven jars and swcs and hopefully a working equivalent of the tar.gz and > .zip via Maven using the "distribution" profile. A working "distribution" > profile did not exist in the past so it is a nice-to-have and not a > regression if the distribution profile's tar.gz and .zip has problems. It > would be a regression if it turned out the build.xml files in the release > could not build the tar.gz and .zip correctly. > > The only way I can think of to validate that the build.xml files will do > the right thing is to actually run "ant release" at some point in the > release process. In which case, you might as well use the resulting > artifacts. > > My 2 cents, > -Alex > > On 3/30/20, 12:11 PM, "Yishay Weiss" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Ant artifacts are reproducible by running the Ant scripts. Again, > the scenario is that if an Ant user wants to try a local change in an IDE > or NPM we want >to ensure that they can run the Ant "release" target and > get the tar.gz or .zip they need. > > “Again” suggests you’ve already given an explanation, but I couldn’t > find it. Can you expand on this scenario? If this is the only difference > you and Chris have I think it’s worth focusing on it. > > On 3/30/20, 2:17 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > thanks. I revise and for me is totally fine :) > > > El lun., 30 mar. 2020 a las 9:33, Harbs (<[email protected]>) > escribió: > > > Thanks for that. The Google Doc is a great initiative! > > > > Harbs > > > > > On Mar 30, 2020, at 10:26 AM, Christofer Dutz < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > as the discussion has gone back to: “the release should be as > in the 13 > > steps”, I’d like to re-focus on the probably more important > parts: > > > > > > I already started writing up a list of requirements and > options to > > achieve them: > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1kMlNfgVVAtTBNb57Qe88-d0vbM-HdohgQFqWCBr-cAg%2Fedit%23&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C571ece52cc4f47b3f11008d7d58c6cc5%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637212671413184429&sdata=RQnJ3Ky5N6SPGpPNBMxMnBVfxsPx%2FhXhzrz7GZ%2FRbQI%3D&reserved=0 > > < > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1kMlNfgVVAtTBNb57Qe88-d0vbM-HdohgQFqWCBr-cAg%2Fedit&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C571ece52cc4f47b3f11008d7d58c6cc5%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637212671413194422&sdata=XO1h3oYto2wlD%2Bv8oVSozBEXl96Ryvf3OlCqNv2Ubx4%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > Feel free to continue. > > > > > > Will not participate in the other discussion as it’s showing a > typical > > pattern of progressional-degradation, and continuing that thread > will not > > bring the project forward. > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C571ece52cc4f47b3f11008d7d58c6cc5%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637212671413194422&sdata=RmPHhQh0xxwwk6V86k%2FkVxQCch2DrjNgnE9nOnraO74%3D&reserved=0 > > > > >
