On 3/31/07, Gilles Scokart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I saw that the example in src/examples/go-ivy/build.xml also mention the version (and still jayasoft).
Yes, but we have a circular problem here: go-ivy need a version available on the net to run, so we can't update it to the released version before the release is published... OTOH, releasing without updating to the new version is not a very good thing. We have the same problem for Ivy build itself. So, if anyone has an idea, I take it! - Xavier Gilles
2007/3/29, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi, > > To prepare the release, I've created a developer documentation page > including a release guide. It's already in svn, and will be available on the > web site in about one hour: > http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/doc/dev.html > > I would like to get some feedback on this doc, to see if it makes sense or > not (from an Apache but also build and release point of view). One thing I > still don't know how to address is the case of a vote rejecting the release. > In this case, we'll need to update something and submit again the release. > So, is tagging before the vote a good idea, or should we tag only when the > vote is accepted (note that the release is already build from a branch, so > it's already safely reproducible)? > > Another thing with which I'm not familiar is signing. Do signing files alter > them? I ask this question because we need to provide checksums for the > artifacts, so I'd like to add checksum calculation to the release script, > but since signing occur after the release script, if it alters the artifacts > the checksums must be calculated after signing. > > Any idea and feedback is welcome, I think we are not too far from being able > to release 2.0.0-alpha1! > > - Xavier > -- Gilles SCOKART
-- Learn Ivy at ApacheCon: http://www.eu.apachecon.com/ Manage your dependencies with Ivy! http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/
