Yeah thanks, I forget to add also gene...@lao to the TO line...
----- Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: [email protected] > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael McCandless [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 7:56 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 > and 2.9.1 > > +1 > > (I already +1'd on the other thread, too). > > Mike > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 > > > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Uwe Schindler <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Sorry, > >> > >> I initially didn't want to start a vote, as Grant only proposed to > "maybe > >> start one". But nobody responded (esp. to the questions in this mail) I > ask > >> again, an I will start the vote for now. > >> > >> > >> > ========================================================================== > == > >> Please vote, that the missing artifacts for of fast-verctor-highlighter > of > >> Lucene Java 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 should be pushed to repoX.maven.org. > >> > >> You can find the artifacts here: > >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging- > area/<http://people.apache.org/%7Euschindler/staging-area/> > >> > >> This dir contains only the maven folder to be copied to maven-rsync dir > on > >> p.a.o. The top-level version in the maven metadata is 3.0.0, which > conforms > >> to the current state on maven (so during merging both folders during > build, > >> I set preference to metadata.xml of 3.0.0). > >> > >> All files are signed by my PGP key (even the 2.9.1 ones; that release > was > >> originally built by Mike McCandless). > >> > >> > ========================================================================== > == > >> > >> What I additionally found out until now (because Simon nagged me): > >> > >> If you compare the JAR files inside the binary ZIP file from the apache > >> archive and the JAR files directly published on maven (for the other > >> contribs), the MD5s/SHA1s are different even as they are created from > the > >> same source code (because the timestamps inside the JAR are different, > for > >> 2.9.1 another JDK compiler/platform was used). This interestingly does > not > >> apply to lucene-core.jar in 3.0. Because of that I see no problem with > this > >> maven release, even that they are not the orginal JAR files from the > binary > >> distrib. > >> > >> What is not nice, is that the svn revision number in the manifest is > >> different, but else is exactly the same, see my comments below in > earlier > >> mails about changing the ant script for showing the SVN rev of the last > >> changed file. > >> > >> So if nobody objects to release these rebuild jar files, all signed by > my > >> key, I would like to simply put them on the maven-rsync folder. > >> > >> Uwe > >> > >> ----- > >> Uwe Schindler > >> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > >> http://www.thetaphi.de > >> eMail: [email protected] > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:[email protected]] > >> > Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 6:48 PM > >> > To: [email protected] > >> > Subject: Re: (NAG) Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 > and > >> > 2.9 > >> > > >> > > >> > : What to do now, any votes on adding the missing maven artifacts for > >> > : fast-vector-highlighter to 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 on the apache maven > >> > reposititory? > >> > > >> > It's not even clear to me that anything special needs to be done > before > >> > publishing those jars to maven. 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 were already voted > on > >> and > >> > released -- including all of the source code in them. > >> > > >> > The safest bet least likely to anger the process gods is just to call > a > >> > vote (new thread with VOTE in the subject) and cast a vote ... > >> considering > >> > the sources has already been reviewed it should go pretty quick. > >> > > >> > : > >> > : > I rebuilt the maven-dir for 2.9.1 and 3.0.0, merged them (3.0.0 > is > >> > top- > >> > : > level > >> > : > version) and extracted only fast-vector-highlighter: > >> > : > > >> > : > http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging- > area/<http://people.apache.org/%7Euschindler/staging-area/> > >> > : > > >> > : > I will copy this dir to the maven folder on people.a.o, when I > got > >> > votes > >> > : > (how many)? At least someone should check the signatures. > >> > : > > >> > : > By the way, we have a small error in our ant build.xml that > inserts > >> > : > svnversion into the manifest file. This version is not the > version of > >> > the > >> > : > last changed item (would be svnversion -c) but the current svn > >> > version, > >> > : > even > >> > : > that I checked out the corresponding tags. It's no problem at > all, > >> but > >> > not > >> > : > very nice. > >> > : > > >> > : > Maybe we should change build.xml to call "svnversion -c" in > future, > >> to > >> > get > >> > : > the real number. > >> > : > > >> > : > Uwe > >> > : > > >> > : > ----- > >> > : > Uwe Schindler > >> > : > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > >> > : > http://www.thetaphi.de > >> > : > eMail: [email protected] > >> > : > > >> > : > > >> > : > > -----Original Message----- > >> > : > > From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:[email protected]] > >> > : > > Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 10:26 PM > >> > : > > To: [email protected] > >> > : > > Subject: Re: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 > and > >> > 2.9 > >> > : > > > >> > : > > I suppose we could put up the artifacts on a dev site and then > we > >> > could > >> > : > > vote to release both of them pretty quickly. I think that > should > >> be > >> > : > easy > >> > : > > to do, since it pretty much only involves verifying the jar and > the > >> > : > > signatures. > >> > : > > > >> > : > > On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Simon Willnauer wrote: > >> > : > > > >> > : > > > hi folks, > >> > : > > > The maven artifacts for fast-vector-highlighter have never > been > >> > pushed > >> > : > > > since it was released because there were no pom.xml.template > >> > inside > >> > : > > > the module. I added a pom file a day ago in the context of > >> > : > > > LUCENE-2107. I already talked to uwe and grant how to deal > with > >> > this > >> > : > > > issues and if we should push the artifact for Lucene 2.9 / > 3.0. > >> > Since > >> > : > > > this is only a metadata file we could consider rebuilding the > >> > : > > > artefacts and publish them for those releases. I can not > remember > >> > that > >> > : > > > anything like that happened before, so we should discuss how > to > >> > deal > >> > : > > > with this situation and if we should wait until 3.1. > >> > : > > > > >> > : > > > simon > >> > : > > > > >> > : > > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > --- > >> > : > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev- > [email protected] > >> > : > > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev- > [email protected] > >> > : > > > > >> > : > > > >> > : > > > >> > : > > > >> > : > > > >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > - > >> > : > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > : > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev- > [email protected] > >> > : > > >> > : > > >> > : > > >> > : > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > >> > : > 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] > >> > : > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -Hoss > >> > > >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Ted Dunning, CTO > > DeepDyve > >
