We can do taverna-engine and taverna-common-activities separately if that makes sense.. I was thinking that we don't really know they work until used in the command line and the command line would be useful for the GSOC students (e.g. particularly for the Docker activity) - but I'm open to either. If we don't do the
I was thinking of preparing the release candidate this week - but I think rather wait until early May so we get that US Export declaration sorted first. On 26 April 2016 at 00:18, Gale Naylor <[email protected]> wrote: > Also, I thought we were going to release taverna-engine and > taverna-common-activities before taverna-command-line. I apologize if I > missed the discussion on this. > > Stian, do you have a rough date in mind for the release? > > Gale > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 4:17 PM Gale Naylor <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> >> It's what we've done so far.. I didn't mean we won't publish to Maven >> Central - but that we won't try to release the build >> taverna-commandline-product zip file on dist.apache.org, as that would >> include lib/*.jar for all of our dependencies. (we would need to >> propagate their licenses) >> >> I'm a little confused because I thought releases only consisted of sources >> and not binaries. But then I also found this link: >> >> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#notes-on-source-only-releases >> >> Is this correct: Apache releases are only source code, but most projects >> also release binaries for convenience (and these binaries also have to have >> the licenses checked), and if you don't release any binaries it's called a >> source-only release? >> >> So, as long as the binary files don't go on dist.apache.org, we don't >> have to check the licenses? Do the binaries have dependencies that are NOT >> in the source files? Can you give me an example? (Sorry for the barrage of >> questions.) >> >> Thanks, >> >> Gale >> >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:51 AM Stian Soiland-Reyes <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> It's what we've done so far.. I didn't mean we won't publish to Maven >>> Central - but that we won't try to release the build >>> taverna-commandline-product zip file on dist.apache.org, as that would >>> include lib/*.jar for all of our dependencies. (we would need to >>> propagate their licenses) >>> >>> >>> >>> On 21 April 2016 at 13:21, Ian Dunlop <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Hello, >>> > >>> > Is there a different procedure for a source only release? Do we need to >>> > document that? >>> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > >>> > Ian >>> > >>> > On 21/04/16 07:39, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: >>> >> Hi, >>> >> >>> >> Shall we try to get out a release of Taverna Command Line? >>> >> >>> >> That would mean the repositories: >>> >> >>> >> taverna-engine >>> >> taverna-common-activities >>> >> taverna-commandline >>> >> >>> >> I think they are in a good state now, although we ideally should have >>> a bit >>> >> more example workflows. >>> >> >>> >> I suggest we do a source only release of cmd line this time to avoid >>> >> overloading mentors in reviewing the binary distribution (which would >>> mean >>> >> propagating NOTICE and LICENSE from all external JARs) >>> >> >>> >> Are there any remaining work we should finish first? >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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
