Hello, Just doing some build checks in advance of this potential release and got a failure for engine :(
[INFO] Apache Taverna Reference Manager API ............... FAILURE [ 0.583 s] [ERROR] Failed to execute goal org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin:3.2:compile (default-compile) on project taverna-reference-api: Fatal error compiling: invalid target release: 1.8 -> [Help 1] Does that 1.8 refer to Java 8? What version are we targeting now? Cheer, Ian On 28 April 2016 at 10:11, Stian Soiland-Reyes <[email protected]> wrote: > On 26 April 2016 at 22:39, Gale Naylor <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Taverna Commandline README Questions: > > > > 1) Is the prerequisite of Java 1.7 still good? > > No - fixed to 8 > > > 2) Should we delete the Nightly Build section since it deals with > > unreleased versions? > > I've removed the section about nightly build downloads, and changed > the rest to describe use of SNAPSHOT dependencies instead. (This can > be relevant for someone who wants to test the commandline with their > own SNAPSHOT of say taverna-common-activities) > > > > 3) In the Running section: Should we take out the references to SNAPSHOT > > builds and any other prerelease references? > > Done. > > > 4) In the Building section: There is a statement "Note that this > repository > > relies on other Apache Taverna modules …" > > Is this referring to taverna-commandline modules: -api, -common, > -launcher, > > -product, or other Taverna modules? > > It links to http://taverna.incubator.apache.org/code - specifically it > is all those above (taverna-maven-parent, taverna-language, > taverna-osgi, taverna-engine, taverna-common-activities). > > I'm not sure what to call these units that we keep in each git > repository and release as separate src archives - as there can be > confusion with Maven Modules as you say. > > > > 5) Also, the README mentions a Derby server instance as well as the > > Credential Manager. Does this usage of the Derby server require an > addition > > to the Export XML file? > > Yes! > > Basically the Command Line README Export would need to list all of the > restricted ones, as in the end it will gather all of it under lib/ > > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 11:50 AM Gale Naylor < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Taverna Commandline Documentation: > >> > >> What needs to change in the 2.x documentation? > >> https://taverna.incubator.apache.org/documentation/command-line/ > >> If you can bullet-point things that need to change, I'll create a new > >> webpage for it. Then we can reference this in the README file. > >> > >> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 11:08 AM Gale Naylor < > [email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Regarding the US Export declaration issue: > >>> If I can summarize what Stian and Ian have said (please correct me if > I'm > >>> wrong), there are two issues. The first issue is that several Taverna > >>> components use a credential manager that uses the Bouncy Castle > encryption > >>> library. The second issue is we're trying to determine if we also need > to > >>> declare code that uses Apache HTTP Components, Java Secure Socket > >>> Extension, etc. (See Stian's draft XML doc for the complete possible > list - > >>> see link below.) > >>> > >>> If the export restrictions apply, we have to > >>> (1) Initiate update of www.apache.org/licenses/exports Product > >>> Classification Matrix.(The Incubator PMC must send the official update > >>> request.) > >>> (2) Send a notice to the US Government > >>> (3) Add a crypto notice to all relevant README files (example: > >>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/README) > >>> > >>> More info: > >>> ASF Export info: http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/#embargoed > >>> JIRA issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-959 > >>> Question for Legal: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-250 > >>> Draft Taverna Export XML: > >>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TAVERNADEV/Taverna+Crypto+draft+XML > >>> Reporting requirements: http://www.apache.org/dev/crypto.html > >>> > >>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 9:57 AM Gale Naylor < > [email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Regarding release order: I was just curious. It sounds logical to > >>>> release the command line first since it would be helpful for the GSOC > >>>> students and doesn't depend on taverna-engine or > taverna-common-activities. > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 9:30 AM Alan Williams < > [email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On 26-Apr-16 17:05, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > >>>>> > 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. > >>>>> > >>>>> Can you give a brief summary of the "US Export declaration" issue? > >>>>> > >>>>> Alan > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > > > > -- > Stian Soiland-Reyes > Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating) > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 >
