>> 2. we make each app package their own module. Along this we should make a more flexible folder structure for app packaging - say HBase should include the sub-folder for the package for Windows or Linux. Distro level distinction could also be allowed. Memcached can live in samples at the top level under app-packages.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Steve Loughran <[email protected]> wrote: > having worked on this, I'm coming to the conclusion that this can't be done > for slider 0.60, not so much for the pom and the vote but for > > * Storm and HBase app packages installing bad pom names (SLIDER-627 ) > * the legacy application providers ending up being installed. > > I'm going to fix this with > > SLIDER-655 split app packages out of slider POM for independent releases > > either > 1. we add a new project, slider-applications with each application package > a module > or > 2. we make each app package their own module. > > if we can get the maven inheritance right, #2 makes it easier to run each > on on their own version numbering > > SLIDER-656 drop providers/hbase and providers/accumulo > > We don't need these now the functional tests go beyond what these tests > did. > > > > On 24 November 2014 at 17:17, Steve Loughran <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > OK > > > > On 24 November 2014 at 16:29, Billie Rinaldi <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> I don't think we can publish artifacts to maven without voting on them > as > >> part of a release. You could stage the artifacts corresponding to 0.60 > >> and > >> we could vote on them separately from the original 0.60 vote. > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 4:45 AM, Steve Loughran <[email protected] > > > >> wrote: > >> > >> > one more task which I'll see about doing: getting the slider- > artifacts > >> > onto maven > >> > > >> > On 24 November 2014 at 09:44, Steve Loughran <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > I stepped away from the git-flow as it didn't seem to handle where > >> we'd > >> > > got to with having a branch-0.60 hanging around for a > while...changes > >> > were > >> > > cherry picked into there from the develop branch. Git-flow doesn't > >> seem > >> > to > >> > > like cherry picking, and I think we'd outgrown its release process. > >> > > > >> > > w.r.t master I think we should just force merge the 0.60 branch into > >> it > >> > > > >> > > On 22 November 2014 at 20:22, Josh Elser <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> Oh right. I also made the release-0.60.0 tag and pushed that. > >> > >> > >> > >> I did *not* merge that tag into master because there was a merge > >> > conflict > >> > >> (which, as far as I understand it, shouldn't even happen with the > >> > git-flow > >> > >> model). > >> > >> > >> > >> SLIDER-398 (specifically 8434b8971af93fe316e4b4c9f6d4a2a917caedd0) > >> > >> appears to only exist in master and not in any other release. I > >> believe > >> > >> that the proper course of action would be to revert the commit in > >> > master, > >> > >> merge the tag into master, and then reapply the change to master > (if > >> > >> necessary) and merge master back into develop so we don't run into > >> this > >> > >> again for the next release. Thoughts before I go ahead and do this? > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Josh Elser wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> Status update: vote on general@incubator closed yesterday with > >> > success. > >> > >>> Here's where we stand now: > >> > >>> > >> > >>> * Artifacts are uploaded to dist.apache.org (should be propagated > >> by > >> > >>> Sunday 1400 EST) > >> > >>> * Updated the website for the release > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Things that need to be done: > >> > >>> > >> > >>> * Write up release notes - > >> > >>> > >> http://slider.incubator.apache.org/release_notes/release-0.60.0.html. > >> > I > >> > >>> haven't done this because I haven't kept up to date well enough to > >> give > >> > >>> adequate credit to the new things in 0.60.0. > >> > >>> * Send out announcement after mirrors update > >> > >>> > >> > >>> I think that's all.. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> - Josh > >> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > >> > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or > >> entity to > >> > which it is addressed and may contain information that is > confidential, > >> > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the > >> reader > >> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified > >> that > >> > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > >> > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > >> > received this communication in error, please contact the sender > >> immediately > >> > and delete it from your system. Thank You. > >> > > >> > > > > > > -- > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately > and delete it from your system. Thank You. > -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Thank You.
