It looks like the common code that puts in the issuesFixed report is in the uima-ducc/pom.xml project, but is commented out (because it's limited to 100 issues, as you've noted).
If it was being used, it would have put the issuesFixed report into the right spot in the source-release, and that would have been also picked up by the binary assembly, I think. I think that your workaround inserted the equivalent issuesFixed only into the binary. -Marshall On 7/21/2016 9:17 AM, Jaroslaw Cwiklik wrote: > Hmm, isnt the missing issuesFixed a problem of the UIMA parent pom? Perhaps > I am wrong but i thought this was supposed to be handled by common scripts > inherited by Ducc project. If this is false assumption I'd be happy to fix > this in Ducc, but what needs changing to force inclusion of the > issuesFixed? > > -jerry > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Jaroslaw Cwiklik <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Marshall, I checked the binary tarball and there is a directory called >> issuesFixed containing jira-report.html. I had to build the report by hand >> due to maven plugin bug (design?) with jira count > 100. I suppose maven >> wants us to be more agile with the releases :) >> >> You must be referring to some other place where this report is missing. >> Can you clarify? >> >> -jerry >> >> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I see that the "issues fixed" part of the release artifacts is omitted. I >>> presume this is intentional, probably because the number of issues in this >>> release ( ~198 ) would break the auto generation of this report. >>> >>> One reason for including this in the release is because the alternative, >>> namely >>> linking to the Jira website page for this version, is not "frozen" - it >>> could be >>> updated at any point in time, by anyone with Jira authoring capability, >>> including after the release. >>> >>> We should probably have a consensus around including or omitting the >>> issues-fixed part of the release. I think it is probably OK, as I don't >>> think >>> there's much use made of this, and the jira website report could serve >>> adequately. >>> >>> What do others think? >>> >>> -Marshall >>> >>> On 7/20/2016 2:43 PM, Jaroslaw Cwiklik wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> the UIMA-DUCC 2.1.0 release candidate 3 is ready for voting. >>>> >>>> This version contains the following changes for issues found in RC2: >>>> >>>> - Updated RELEASE_NOTES >>>> - Updated binary LICENSE >>>> >>>> The list of all changes in Jira: >>>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%222.1.0-Ducc%22%20ORDER%20BY%20key%20ASC >>>> The source and binary zip/tars are staged here: >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/uima-ducc/2.1.0/RC3/ >>>> >>>> The Maven artifacts are here: >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1101 >>>> >>>> The SVN tags are here: >>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uima-ducc/tags/uima-ducc-2.1.0/ >>>> >>>> See http://uima.apache.org/testing-builds.html for suggestions on how >>> to >>>> test >>>> release candidates. >>>> >>>> Please vote on release: >>>> >>>> [ ] +1 OK to release >>>> [ ] 0 Don't care >>>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ... >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>
