-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/41756/#review112107
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Post commit shipit from me.

- Zameer Manji


On Dec. 28, 2015, 3:59 p.m., John Sirois wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/41756/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Dec. 28, 2015, 3:59 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora, Bill Farner and Zameer Manji.
> 
> 
> Bugs: AURORA-1566
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1566
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora-packaging
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> That upgrade was performed here: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41755/.
> 
>  builder/deb/ubuntu-trusty/Dockerfile | 4 ++--
>  specs/debian/control                 | 2 +-
>  specs/rpm/aurora.spec                | 2 +-
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   builder/deb/ubuntu-trusty/Dockerfile 
> 9f0257d74f7cda1854d4d065e110e24cdc2b77ad 
>   specs/debian/control 4aa6bf3c3c9c27b9d6ca2c0964e8178269bbd60e 
>   specs/rpm/aurora.spec e2d6f81b310687c648c91cf59ecdf3fe907d1dfe 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41756/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Ran through the README for deb and rpm and both packages built.
> 
> deb:
> ```
> aurora $ git archive --prefix=apache-aurora-$(cat .auroraversion)/ -o 
> snapshot.tar.gz HEAD
> aurora-packaging $ ./build-artifact.sh builder/deb/ubuntu-trusty 
> ../aurora/snapshot.tar.gz 0.12.0-SNAPSHOT
> ```
> 
> rpm (script has issues with versions like 0.12.0-SNAPSHOT, filed 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1568):
> ```
> aurora $ git archive --prefix=apache-aurora-0.12.0_SNAPSHOT/ -o 
> snapshot.tar.gz HEAD
> aurora-packaging $ ./build-artifact.sh builder/rpm/centos-7 
> ../aurora/snapshot.tar.gz 0.12.0_SNAPSHOT
> ```
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> John Sirois
> 
>

Reply via email to