Hi all, Andreas is correct. I discussed the issue on legal@, and the conclusions were to stage a Maven Repository. Also, we might need to work with infra@ to get the permissions etc sorted out, and we will have to use the Maven release plugin to sign the Maven artifacts.
Now, Rampart and Sandesha2, should be having a nearly similar structure, and we should be able to follow the same approach here. Thanks, Senaka. On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Andreas Veithen <[email protected]>wrote: > On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 16:07, Senaka Fernando <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Andreas, > > > > On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Andreas Veithen < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 07:33, Senaka Fernando <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > Hi Andreas, > >> > > >> > Many thanks for reminding. > >> > > >> > On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 4:54 AM, Andreas Veithen > >> > <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Unfortunately, the release candidate doesn't yet meet the (new) ASF > >> >> requirements for a valid release :-(. See [1]: > >> >> > >> >> "Every artifact distributed by the Apache Software Foundation should > >> >> and every new one must be accompanied by one file containing an > >> >> OpenPGP compatible ASCII armored detached signature and another file > >> >> containing an MD5 checksum." > >> >> > >> >> Although the document doesn't mention Maven artifacts explicitly, the > >> >> common interpretation [2] of this requirement is that every > individual > >> >> Maven artifact must be signed. > >> > > >> > I will get this clarified, to how this should be done. Signing Maven > >> > artifacts should not be done manually, it should be done automatically > >> > through Maven itself. And, I don't see many apache projects doing the > >> > same > >> > as of now. > >> >> > >> >> Also, I think that the key used to sign the distributions doesn't > meet > >> >> the new requirements in terms of key type and length. > >> > > >> > Yes, that's a concern, the required key-lengths were revised, and > >> > mentioned > >> > at the very top of [1]. There were some instructions to how you could > >> > upgrade, if you already have a weak key. > >> >> > >> >> These requirements are part of the reasons why I migrated Axiom, > Axis2 > >> >> and Sandesha2 to the (new) standard ASF release process based on > >> >> maven-release-plugin and Nexus. It automates most of the stuff and > >> >> Nexus does some validation of the artifacts already when staging > them. > >> >> I think we should migrate Rampart as well, at least for the next > >> >> release. > >> > > >> > So, have you got the Maven Release plugin to sign artifacts as > >> > mentioned, > >> > plus upload them to ASF's Maven repositories in a single go? > >> > >> Yes. Here are the documents that explain how this is executed for > >> Axiom and Axis2: > >> > >> http://ws.apache.org/axiom/devguide/ch02.html#d0e326 > >> http://axis.apache.org/axis2/java/core/release-process.html > >> > >> Sandesha2 pretty much sticks to the standard procedure: > >> > >> http://www.apache.org/dev/publishing-maven-artifacts.html > >> > >> As mentioned earlier, before this could be applied to Rampart, you > >> would have to request inclusion of org.apache.rampart in the staging > >> profile for Axis2. > > > > Thanks for the information. For the benefit of someone who's reading this > > mail thread, the documents that Andreas linked also explains how you > could > > publish the artifacts on the staging repo etc. > > > > Having said that, I am yet to figure out the legitimacy (hard to find the > > people during the holiday season, :-).. ) of a release without having the > > Maven artifacts signed, for projects that are not under the Maven PMC (I > > found out that they do need something as such). > > > > But, as you have mentioned in your first reply to this thread, I'm +1 for > > introducing the same concepts for Rampart. My concern is that, if these > > requirements are not mandatory, we could go ahead with this release, > instead > > of delaying it (some other releases, Synapse is also waiting for this > > AFAIK), and fix these inconsistencies for the next release. > > I think these requirements are mandatory for all projects. What is > sure is that if the Maven artifacts are not signed, you will get a > friendly reminder about that: > > http://markmail.org/search/?q=%22your+MAVEN+repo+artifacts%22 > > We can't simply ignore this. > > > However, in general, everything under [1] are mandatory, and enforced by > the > > ASF. > > > > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html > > > > Thanks, > > Senaka. > >> > >> > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Senaka. > >> >> > >> >> Andreas > >> >> > >> >> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html > >> >> [2] > >> >> http://people.apache.org/~henkp/repo/faq.html<http://people.apache.org/%7Ehenkp/repo/faq.html> > >> >> > >> >> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 05:37, Selvaratnam Uthaiyashankar > >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > Devs, > >> >> > > >> >> > This is the vote for Apache Rampart 1.5.1 release. > >> >> > > >> >> > Please review the signed artifacts: > >> >> > > >> >> > http://people.apache.org/~shankar/rampart/1.5.1/dist/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eshankar/rampart/1.5.1/dist/> > >> >> > > >> >> > The m2 repository is available at: > >> >> > http://people.apache.org/~shankar/rampart/1.5.1/m2_repo/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eshankar/rampart/1.5.1/m2_repo/> > >> >> > > >> >> > The site is temporarily hosted at: > >> >> > http://people.apache.org/~shankar/rampart/1.5.1/site/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eshankar/rampart/1.5.1/site/> > >> >> > > >> >> > SVN Info: > >> >> > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/axis/axis2/java/rampart/tags/v1.5.1 > >> >> > > >> >> > It was tested against Axis2 release candidates hosted in: > >> >> > http://people.apache.org/~veithen/1.5.4/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eveithen/1.5.4/> > >> >> > > >> >> > Here's my +1 (binding) to declare the above dist as Apache Rampart > >> >> > 1.5.1 > >> >> > > >> >> > thanks, > >> >> > Shankar > >> >> > > >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> > 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] > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Senaka Fernando > >> > Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://apache.org > >> > > >> > Associate Technical Lead & Product Manager - WSO2 G-Reg; > >> > WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com > >> > > >> > E-mail: senaka AT apache.org > >> > P: +94 11 223 2481; M: +94 77 322 1818 > >> > Linked-In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/senakafernando > >> > Blog: http://senakafdo.blogspot.com > >> > > >> > > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> -- > >> Senaka Fernando > >> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://apache.org > >> > >> Associate Technical Lead & Product Manager - WSO2 G-Reg; > >> WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com > >> > >> E-mail: senaka AT apache.org > >> P: +94 11 223 2481; M: +94 77 322 1818 > >> Linked-In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/senakafernando > >> Blog: http://senakafdo.blogspot.com > >> > >> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- *Senaka Fernando* Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://apache.org * Associate Technical Lead & Product Manager - WSO2 G-Reg; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com** <http://apache.org/> E-mail: senaka AT apache.org **P: +94 11 223 2481*; *M: +94 77 322 1818 Linked-In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/senakafernando Blog: http://senakafdo.blogspot.com *
