Luciano Resende wrote:
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:00 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:03 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> wrote:
BTW, should we ask infrastructure to remove the old SNAPSHOTs
available at the old snapshot repository to avoid any possible
conflicts as they seem to be at least several months old ?
[1] http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/tuscany/sca/
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
What's the situation with any future 1.x and travel sample releases.
Are we going via Nexus repo for those. Maybe we don't have a choice
but before we remove the old stuff we'd need to fix the 1.x pom in the
same way.
IMHO we should leave 1.x alone, I'm pretty underwhelmed by the 2.x
move to Nexus, all it seems to do is change from the old
people.apache.org staging repos that we could use with all the
existing command line tools to use a new place thats only accessible
through a slow and a less functional web GUI.
...ant
Will moving to Nexus be mandatory now or in the future?
I don't think so. Nexus is really aimed at maven based releases and
not all projects use maven, and making things mandatory is not the
sort of thing that the ASF really likes to do.
...ant
But one way or another, when hudson is building and publishing
snapshots it's going to Nexus even before we had done any changes, and
that's why I was having problems, as the people.apache.org snapshots
were several months old.
To fix that just we just need to update the snapshot repo definition
which is a much smaller and safer change than changing the parent
pom.xml
We should probably change the 1.x version of the apache pom as well,
and that does not require us to move to use Nexus for releases as we
are still doing manual steps for the 1.x release.
That will almost certainly break things so i don't think we should
unless at the same time a whole 1.x release is also done to find and
fix all the problems.
....ant
Fine with me. I'll leave 1.x as is... Maybe Simon N. could pick this
up as he has proposed a new 1.6.1 release... but not a must do for
now...
I'll look at this but if it causes significant breakage I think it
should be deferred to 1.7. The intention for 1.6.1 is to limit the
work to important bug fixes only.
Simon
