I should work with everyones exsiting apache userids, let me know if it doesn't. It would also be good to find a way so you don't need to logon to look at the staged releases, i've no idea if thats possible or not with Nexus.
...ant On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:24 PM, kelvin goodson <[email protected]> wrote: > This sounds like a real advance. I followed the link but was asked > for a nexus login id and password. What's the story there? Do we all > need to apply for one of these? > > Kelvin. > > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 2:32 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:57 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 3:24 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Mike Edwards >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Luciano Resende wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:37 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Its three weeks since the M5 release now and it would be good to try >>>>>>>> to do more frequent releases so how about aiming for another release >>>>>>>> in a few weeks time? Don't need to do anything about it yet, just if >>>>>>>> you have things you're working on for the next release keep this time >>>>>>>> frame in mind - so that would be done in two weeks leaving the last >>>>>>>> week to sort out the release and voting. Does that suite everyone? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Â ...ant >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To my surprise, I still hear from people that are using Tuscany that >>>>>>> they haven't look too serious in the 2.x yet, because it's a milestone >>>>>>> release. Any reason not to call this our 2.0 release ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Folks, >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 to another release - and I agree with Luciano, time to encourage folk >>>>>> to >>>>>> use 2.x so I'm in favour of making this a full release. We're getting >>>>>> close >>>>>> on OASIS compliance and the functionality is looking good. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I agree calling these "milestone" releases puts people of using it. >>>>> How about though we call this next release something else (beta?) and >>>>> do the one after that as 2.0? That would give a little more time to >>>>> polish things so when people do try it they get a good experience. >>>>> There is still quite a lot that could do with tidying - the samples, >>>>> website, etc, - and I'm not sure we'd get much of that done in just >>>>> the next three weeks along with all the other work that is currently >>>>> being done. >>>>> >>>>> ...ant >>>>> >>>> >>>> +1 for next release being a beta. Once we catch up with recent changes >>>> in the JCA otests and complete the last few tests elsewhere we'll be >>>> looking good, given the current state of the OASIS tests, in >>>> demonstrating the full set of "core" function which I believe includes >>>> Assembly, JCA, JCI, Policy, WS. I put "core" as this is the minimum >>>> set of function required to actually run the otests. >>>> >>>> The otests may still change of course but it seems right to be going >>>> for a beta so that we can then work on polishing the runtime, docs >>>> etc. while people take a look at the beta and report back. >>>> >>> >>> That sounds ok to me. >>> >>> Going by the timing suggested earlier in this thread we should be >>> doing the release about now, so I'd like to do that as soon as we've >>> sorted out all the current build and otest failures, which should mean >>> an RC sometime this week if that fits in with everyone. I've created a >>> Java-SCA-2.0-Beta1 JIRA category for the release so use that for jiras >>> for things wanted in the release. >>> >>> ...ant >>> >> >> Ok i've taken a branch and tag and run a release using the nexus and >> the new release process. So far so simple and with one mvn command it >> did everything including all the signing and uploads (though it did >> take a few hours). Still working out how all this new stuff works but >> whats there is available at >> https://repository.apache.org/index.html#stagingRepositories. All the >> distributions and everything are all in the staging repo, would be >> easier to find a way to separate them out but i'm not sure how to do >> that yet. I'm reviewing it now, if anyone else wants to please do post >> any comments. >> >> ...ant >> >
