For commons transaction I did exactly that.
Create/sign the RC as if it was the final release, but only put it on
temporary storage without notifying anyone external.
IMHO a RC is not meant to check for remaining bugs, but rather to see
if the distro looks ok, installs, etc.
That means the RC is never actually released to the users. This is
what betas or milestones are for.
Disclaimer: Certainly not official. This is my personal way of making releases.
Cheers
Oliver
2007/5/21, Nick Burch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi All
For the 3.0 release of POI, we followed the advice on voting on
artificats, the not the state of the tree. So, we used our ant script to
produce RC artificats, signed them, and placed them on people.apache.org
for review.
After the vote, we renamed the files from -RC4- to -FINAL-, tweaked the
filenames inside the .md5 files, and copied into /dist/.
Two snags though:
* we had to re-generate the maven pom, and re-sign it, as that holds the
release version in it, which changed
* we forgot that the .tar.gz and .zip files all have poi-3.0-rc4 as their
base directory name, since the directory name is generated dynamically
in build.xml
What do other people do about this for their releases, when voting on
artificats? Do you do each build as if it was -FINAL (so that gets embeded
into all the directory names etc), then rename the artificats for voting,
or something else?
Thanks
Nick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
