-- 
Rod Simpson
@rockerston
rodsimpson.com

On June 18, 2014 at 7:45:11 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney 
([email protected]) wrote:

Hi Rod, 

Thank you for stepping forward to take this on. It is great news. 

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:01 PM, < 
[email protected]> wrote: 

> 
> 1. We only release one artifact (compressed archive - tar ball, zip, etc). 
> We previously discussed releasing everything (stack, sdks, portal) 
> separately, but after further discussions with many of you, the consensus 
> is that a single artifact would be more streamlined and user friendly. 
> 

I have no problem with this. I would however like to see the conversation 
trail. 

I would like to clarify here that the type of artifacts would would like to 
publish are source artifacts contained within one container? 
RS: I was thinking Binary in the deployable directories and Source in others.  
I am not familiar with all the Apache Regs, so maybe I need to revisit the plan.

You do not 
want to push individual artifacts to Maven central for consumption within 
projects builds? 
RS: I am fine with us pushing to Maven or equivalent (e.g. npm for Node.js SDK, 
Ruby as a Gem, etc), but I thought that wasn’t part of the “official release”.


Is there any reason why we can't both? Or is UG just not that type of 
project? I would be surprised if we cannot include an SDK in our project 
build. 

RS: By this do you mean that we should push everything to Maven?  Including the 
non-Java code?  


> 
> 2. The artifact will have a directory structure as follows: 
> 
> WebApps 
> - built portal code, in war file to be served off of Tomcat 
> - stack war file 
> - ideally, users can simply deploy what is in this directory to Tomcat 
> Lib 
> - sample usergrid props file 
> Launcher 
> - Jar file for launcher in separate dir 
> Docs 
> - docs describing how to get up and running w/ Usergrid 
> SDKs 
> - each SDK will be in its own subdirectory 
> UGC 
> - can’t forget our awesome command line utility 
> - should this include the UGC code? Or just a readme file telling how 
> to install (it is a Ruby Gem)? Or should we simply reference UGC in the 
> Docs? 
> 
> 
> We NEED to add 


- LICENSE, 
- README, 
- NOTICE, 
- DISCLAIMER 
- evidence of stable and successful builds. AFAIK we are not doing this 
right now. 

We need to have a core source artifact. e.g. EVERYTHING contained within is 
pure source. 

We MAY want to add 

CHANGES e.g. the Jira roadmap report 
... 
Thanks for starting this thread. 
Lewis 

Reply via email to