+1! Would you be OK to start? I guess Andy's list is a good starting point. I can add my "shell tricks" where they fit. (and then we can remove the more evil ones :))
On 2 March 2016 at 17:42, Gale Naylor <[email protected]> wrote: > I like the "what do i do now" section. What if we develop it in the wiki > and then, when we're happy with it, migrate it to the community section of > the website? > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 7:18 AM Stian Soiland-Reyes <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Yeah, we can develop it in the wiki, or append it to >> http://taverna.incubator.apache.org/community/releasing perhaps? >> >> There should be a "I received a VOTE email, what do I do now?" section. >> >> On 2 March 2016 at 11:59, Ian Dunlop <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hello, >> > >> > I think we need to capture all these tricks somewhere. Stian suggested we >> > propose updating the 'official' apache release page - sounds like a good >> > idea - but I think we could add it to the taverna pages first and then >> > maybe send a link to it to the (I don't know) incubator list to gauge >> > interest. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > >> > Ian >> > >> > 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 >> -- Stian Soiland-Reyes Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating) http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
