I was thinking of doing this actually but I thought maven plugin will be fixed some day and the reports would be auto generated instead of hand built. Its really puzzling to me that changes plugin has such a bug in it and nobody complained to fix it. I must say I never had more than 100 jiras in UIMA-AS. Perhaps its true for others since Agile is practiced more and more these days. Perhaps we should adapt? :) I'd try to push for that. More releases with fewer jiras. I think I have sufficient motivation to convince others to release more frequently.
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: > What you did sounds OK to me. My guess is that all you need to do is to > put it > in the standard/conventional place where the maven-changes-plugin would > put it, > which is > > uima-ducc/issuesFixed .... > > and not where it currently is: > > uima-ducc/src/main/issuesFixed > > and then the normal source-assembly build should pick it up (he said > hopefully > :-) ). You may need to update other parts of the build affected by moving > it to > the standard spot... (e.g. the readme / release note links) > > -Marshall > > On 7/21/2016 11:07 AM, Jaroslaw Cwiklik wrote: > > I see. My attempts to force the plugin to work with jira count > 100 > > failed. According to maven documentation, there is a setting that > > supposedly allows for overriding the default number of jiras > > *maxEntries > > < > https://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-changes-plugin/jira-report-mojo.html#maxEntries > >* > > int - Maximum number of entries to be fetched from JIRA. > > *Default value is*: 100. > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Tried setting to 300 but it did not work. I think you and I looked into > > this before and the conclusion was to create jira report > > manually. > > > > What I did for the binary I've added hand crafted jira-report to > > src/main/issuesFixed and committed that to svn. The build > > checks this out and includes in the binary tarball. Nor sure what I can > do > > to get this report into src tarball. > > Certainly the hand crafting of jira report is not standard but the only > > thing I could think of to get the report > > into binary. If you have other suggestions I can try a different > approach. > > -jerry > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> 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. > >>>>>> > >> > >
