Perhaps we should try to write it up and (propose an) update for http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html -- there would be many differences of opinions!
BTW, all incubator committers can contribute to improve the Incubator site as well using https://cms.apache.org/incubator/ - just be careful about policy documents. On 1 March 2016 at 22:42, Gale Naylor <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you, Stian! Some of my questions I figured out today, but some I did > not, so I very much appreciate the hints and instructions. > > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 2:28 PM Stian Soiland-Reyes <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks for reviewing! >> >> >> > (1) How do I verify that the commit id in the downloaded files matches >> that >> > in the VOTE email? (I've looked on the internet, but have yet to find >> > anything helpful.) >> >> I don't think most people check this deeply.. but I guess at least one >> voter should. >> >> Here's what I do: >> >> mkdir 1 ; cd 1 # new folder >> git clone that-repository >> git checkout that-commit-id-from-the-email-asdfjaskdjfsakjdfksajdf >> rm -rf * >> unzip ../the-release-candidate.zip >> mv apache-taverna-*/* . (one level up) >> git status >> >> Git will then check the checksums of every file and let you know what >> has 'changed' (as it would believe you have edited it). >> >> >> Here's another way that doesn't require using the 'git' command: >> >> Download the git commit corresponding to the email by browsing for it on >> GitHub: >> >> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-taverna-language/tree/66866a5454ed23262c055f65155d7a195c68a17d >> Click "Download ZIP" >> >> mkdir 1 ; cd 1 >> unzip ../66866a5454ed23262c055f65155d7a195c68a17d.zip >> >> cd ../ ; mkdir 2 ; cd 2 >> unzip release-candidate.zip >> >> cd .. >> diff -uR 1 2 >> >> The files that differ (and their differences!) will be shown. >> >> Make sure you don't have any target/ folders before diff-ing (run mvn >> clean to be sure) >> >> If you do the above with a git clone instead - remember that the zip >> doesn't include the .git/ folder - so you would have to delete the >> checked out .git folder before diffing. (Don't do this on your >> regular checkout as you would lose all local branches!) >> >> >> >> > (2) Are the "binary artifacts" in the target folders? Which files are >> > considered "binary artifacts?" >> >> Well, the target/ files are binary artifacts, but they (should) have >> been made by your build on your machine - not be part of the source >> ZIP. >> >> >> One thing to look out for is in the downloaded source ZIP that there >> are no unexpected binary artifacts in it *before you build* - e.g. >> there should not be any *.jars in there. (The source distribution >> should be 'clean'). We do have some *expected* binaries, pictures and >> test workflows for instance. As those can't have license headers they >> should be declared in NOTICE/LICENSE if they came from third-parties. >> (E.g. if we used a Creative Commons-licensed JPEG picture) >> >> >> In terms of release candidate, the binaries would be installers and >> JARs etc., under >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/taverna/binaries/ >> (But there are none for this release candidate) >> >> ..in addition to the JARs that have been staged to the Maven repository >> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetaverna-1011/org/apache/taverna/ >> >> >> > (3) How do I verify that the build produces the binaries? By visual >> > inspection? What am I looking for? >> >> >> As for checking the Maven repository, if you want to do it really >> proper you should check that all the JARs that are staged can be built >> from the downloaded release candidate ZIP - e.g. that your target/ >> folder contains all of the same ones. If I do this, I do a recursive >> wget of the repository, and then compare the result of "find . -name >> '*jar'" in the wget-tree with */*/target/*.jar. I don't think most >> people do this. >> >> Paranoid-mode would be to download each JAR and check that they only >> have the same *.class files - but these would differ for every build >> and so can't be compared any further without lots of clever tooling - >> so nobody does this. (I think there should be an Apache-hosted tool or >> Maven plugin that could do this). >> >> >> Practically the best is just to click briefly into the repository in a >> browser and see there are not any 'additional' folders that shouldn't >> be there, e.g. we are now voting on taverna-maven-parent, taverna-osgi >> and taverna-language, and so we should not see >> org/apache/taverna/engine in there - as that is a group Id from >> taverna-engine. >> >> (We have already changed the groupIDs to correspond to the repository >> which corresponds to the release name, so at least that correspondance >> is easy to check on Taverna, but not so on many other projects). >> >> >> As binary releases from Apache Software Foundation are considered >> "convenience only" they are not crucial for the vote - the source >> release is the golden thing which everything else should be made from. >> Practically speaking "everyone" uses the JARs from Maven repository >> though, so I wouldn't dismiss them totally - at least one person in >> the vote should do such a check. >> >> >> > (4) How do I check the dependencies? >> >> mvn dependency:tree gives a nice list - but what should you check for? >> Well, it's mainly about licensing - >> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html lists what is compatible as >> dependencies of an ASF release. Now you don't need to go through the >> list - but sometimes there are Well Known forbidden dependencies that >> People (tm) recognize -e.g. mysql-connector and Hibernate are banned >> as they are (L)GPL. >> >> Luckily there's another Maven plugin that can do the job: >> >> mvn license:aggregate-add-third-party >> >> cat target/generated-sources/license/THIRD-PARTY.txt | sort >> >> (Aduna BSD license) OpenRDF Sesame: HTTP client >> (org.openrdf.sesame:sesame-http-client:2.7.0 - >> http://www.openrdf.org/sesame-core/sesame-http/sesame-http-client/) >> (Aduna BSD license) OpenRDF Sesame: HTTP protocol >> (org.openrdf.sesame:sesame-http-protocol:2.7.0 - >> http://www.openrdf.org/sesame-core/sesame-http/sesame-http-protocol/) >> (..) >> (The Apache Software License, Version 2.0) Xerces2-j >> (xerces:xercesImpl:2.11.0 - https://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/) >> (Unknown license) commons-beanutils >> (commons-beanutils:commons-beanutils:1.7.0 - no url defined) >> (Unknown license) com.springsource.org.jaxen >> (org.jaxen:com.springsource.org.jaxen:1.1.1 - no url defined) >> (Unknown license) com.springsource.org.jdom >> (org.jdom:com.springsource.org.jdom:1.1.0 - no url defined) >> (Unknown license) Logging (commons-logging:commons-logging:1.0.3 >> - http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/logging/) >> >> (BTW, those last 4 are already checked to be OK, see >> http://dev.mygrid.org.uk/wiki/display/developer/Third-party+licenses ) >> >> >> > Regarding the build output: Since this is the first time I've done this, >> I >> > don't know what's okay to ignore. Here is a summary of the warning >> messages >> > I received when I ran mvn clean install. I sent the output to two >> different >> > files using the following command (Windows 10/ GitBash): mvn clean >> install >> >> output1.txt 2> output2.txt. I appreciate any insight. >> >> Great! I think those should be tracked in JIRA as we want to reduce >> warnings. >> >> >> >> Generally with Maven, if it finishes with a big SUCCESS, then that's >> true. The warnings are more like warnings for the developers doing >> bad-practice-stuff than warnings about something going wrong with the >> build. Often the fixes are simple, like adding a @Deprecated tag >> where you delibately use old APIs, or actually follow the fix >> suggested by the warning. >> >> I think we want to follow Andy's advice and "release early, release >> often" - which entails a "good enough" - not "super-perfect". >> Obviously each committer votes independenly by their own quality >> measures. >> >> While Apache Software Foundation always says that community is king - >> the Apache name is still recognized by the public as a kind of >> "quality mark" - if that is deserved or not I won't comment on, but of >> course there is also a sense of pride in that we don't want to set the >> standard too low. :) >> >> (E.g. Taverna just cancelled 3 release candidates as they didn't pass >> all their tests on Windows - but the community of another Apache >> project might not consider Windows important enough to halt a release) >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Stian Soiland-Reyes >> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating) >> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 >> -- Stian Soiland-Reyes Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating) http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
