On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 21:40 +0200, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> On Monday 25 July 2016 17:05:29 Robert Munteanu wrote:
> > Hi,
> 
> Hi Robert,
> 
> > I tried to build the karaf reactor, but it seems to reference
> > releases
> > to artifacts under vote. Is there a particular reason for doing
> > that? 
> 
> sure – I'm *very* short in time and trying to get the remaining
> issues fixed 
> before doing a first release.
> 
> Before giving +1 for a release I build from tag, add the artifact to
> Sling 
> Karaf and do a full build cycle with integration tests, try to have a
> look at 
> sources and diff against the previous tag and finally check
> signatures.
> 
> I've done a few releases myself in the last weeks to remove
> remaining 
> snapshots from Sling's Karaf Features. Oak Server is the only blocker
> left – 
> next on my list.
> 
> Instead of removing releases under vote again from Sling's Karaf
> Features I've 
> done one commit with three upcoming releases yesterday (and one with
> a test 
> dependency) – because I cannot stash. And only Resource Resolver
> 1.4.16 is not 
> yet on Maven Central (and the testing fragment bundle), right?


Ack, that makes sense.

> 
> > The downside is that it's not buildable out-of-the box except with
> > very
> > specific setups - you either add all staging repositories or mvn
> > install the missing artifacts from their SVN tags.
> 
> Quoting our own announcement: "Building from verified sources is
> recommended, 
> but convenience binaries are also available via Maven"
> Really, there is no downside. That was just very bad timing. Sling
> Karaf is 
> most of the time in a very convenient state for users in contrast to
> Sling 
> Launchpad. And no harm for our CI builds, I've not added it back to
> any 
> builder after moving.

OK, take the time for bringing it back to a buildable state, I just
wanted to know the reason for your approach as I tried to play with
Karaf + Sling a bit.

Thanks,

Robert

Reply via email to