Re: Release?
On Nov 19, 2010, at 6:18 AM, Karl Wright wrote: > I've created a signing key, and checked in a KEYS file. Apache > instructions for this are actually decent, so I didn't have to make > much stuff up. Glad about that. > Yep, sorry, have been in meetings. > Last remaining release issue is getting the release files to a > download mirror. Maybe I can find some doc for that too. Next steps would be to generate a candidate release which the rest of us can download. Put it up on people.apache.org/~YOURUSERNAME/... and then send a note to the list saying where to locate it. Rather than call a vote right away, just ask us to check it out and try it as there will likely be issues for the first release. Once we all feel we have a decent candidate, we can call a vote, which should be a formality. See http://apache.org/dev/#releases for more info. > > Karl > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Karl Wright wrote: >> The build changes are complete. I removed the modules level from the >> hierarchy because it served no useful purpose and complicated matters. >> The outer level build.xml now allows you build code, docs, and run >> tests separately from one another, and gives you help as a default. >> "ant image" builds you the deliverable .zip and tar.gz files. Online >> site has been polished so that it now contains complete javadoc, as >> does the built and delivered .zip and tar.gz's. In short, we *could* >> actually do a release now, if only we had (and incorporated) the KEYS >> file I alluded to earlier, which I do not know how to build or obtain. >> I believe this needs to be both generated and registered. The site >> also needs to refer to a download location/list of mirrors before it >> could go out the door. >> >> Help? Grant? >> >> Karl >> >> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >>> Hearing nothing, went ahead and made the port of documentation to the >>> site official. I also now include the generated site in the release >>> tar.gz and .zip. >>> Issues still to address before release: >>> >>> (1) source tar.gz and zip in outer-level build.xml, which I will try >>> to address shortly. >>> (2) vehicle for release downloads, and naming thereof. In short, >>> where do I put these things so people can download them?? >>> (3) Voting procedures for release. I've seen this done as a vote in >>> gene...@incubator.org - is that actually necessary? >>> (4) Release branch and tag. Do we want both? What is the correct >>> naming for each in apache? >>> (5) Legal requirements. CHANGES.txt, LICENSE.txt, etc. Do these need >>> to be included in the release tar.gz, or just the source tar.gz? I >>> suspect both, but please confirm. Also, if there is a typical >>> organization of the release tar.gz in relation to the source tar.gz >>> this would be a good time to make that known. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Karl >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Karl Wright wrote: What I've done here is taken all the pages that I originally put in the Wiki, describing how to set up and run ManifoldCF, and converted them to xdocs that are part of the ManifoldCF site. These documents have no user content other than stuff Grant or I added, according to their logs, so I feel that is safe to do. I've left the wiki pages around but am thinking we'll want them to go away at some point. Not sure exactly what to do with all the user comments to them, however. Is this a reasonable way to proceed? We should avoid using the wiki in the future for documentation, seems to me, but otherwise I can see no issues here. Karl On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote: > > On Nov 15, 2010, at 1:23 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote: > >> I didn't mean to imply that the wiki needs to be physically included in >> the release zip/tar, just that snapshotting and versioning of the wiki >> should be done, if feasible, so that a user who is on an older release >> can still see the doc for that release. I am just thinking ahead for >> future releases. So, 0.1 does not need this right now. > > Right, and I'm saying that we can't include user generated content in a > release unless we have explicitly asked for permission on it in the form > of patches and then committed by a committer. Since we don't lock down > our wiki, we can't do it. > >> >> -- Jack Krupansky >> >> -Original Message- From: Grant Ingersoll >> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:23 AM >> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Release? >> >> >> On Nov 10, 2010, at 1:22 AM, Jack Krupansky wrote: >> >>> And the wiki doc is also part of the release. Does this stuff get a >>> version/release as well? Presumably we want doc for currently supported >>> releases, and the doc can vary between releases. Can we eas
Re: Release?
On Nov 17, 2010, at 9:50 PM, Karl Wright wrote: > Hearing nothing, went ahead and made the port of documentation to the > site official. I also now include the generated site in the release > tar.gz and .zip. > Issues still to address before release: > > (1) source tar.gz and zip in outer-level build.xml, which I will try > to address shortly. > (2) vehicle for release downloads, and naming thereof. In short, > where do I put these things so people can download them?? > (3) Voting procedures for release. I've seen this done as a vote in > gene...@incubator.org - is that actually necessary? Yes, we first vote here, Project PMC votes are binding and then we ask for a vote on general. > (4) Release branch and tag. Do we want both? What is the correct > naming for each in apache? I would just tag, but I would wait to do it until the vote passes to save yourself some work. I doubt we need to branch since we won't be releasing bug fixes for a 0.1 release but will instead just point people to 0.2, etc. > (5) Legal requirements. CHANGES.txt, LICENSE.txt, etc. Do these need > to be included in the release tar.gz, or just the source tar.gz? I > suspect both, but please confirm. Also, if there is a typical > organization of the release tar.gz in relation to the source tar.gz > this would be a good time to make that known. yes. > > Thanks, > Karl > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >> What I've done here is taken all the pages that I originally put in >> the Wiki, describing how to set up and run ManifoldCF, and converted >> them to xdocs that are part of the ManifoldCF site. These documents >> have no user content other than stuff Grant or I added, according to >> their logs, so I feel that is safe to do. I've left the wiki pages >> around but am thinking we'll want them to go away at some point. Not >> sure exactly what to do with all the user comments to them, however. >> >> Is this a reasonable way to proceed? We should avoid using the wiki >> in the future for documentation, seems to me, but otherwise I can see >> no issues here. >> >> Karl >> >> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote: >>> >>> On Nov 15, 2010, at 1:23 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote: >>> I didn't mean to imply that the wiki needs to be physically included in the release zip/tar, just that snapshotting and versioning of the wiki should be done, if feasible, so that a user who is on an older release can still see the doc for that release. I am just thinking ahead for future releases. So, 0.1 does not need this right now. >>> >>> Right, and I'm saying that we can't include user generated content in a >>> release unless we have explicitly asked for permission on it in the form of >>> patches and then committed by a committer. Since we don't lock down our >>> wiki, we can't do it. >>> -- Jack Krupansky -Original Message- From: Grant Ingersoll Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:23 AM To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Release? On Nov 10, 2010, at 1:22 AM, Jack Krupansky wrote: > And the wiki doc is also part of the release. Does this stuff get a > version/release as well? Presumably we want doc for currently supported > releases, and the doc can vary between releases. Can we easily snapshot > the wiki? You can't put Wiki in a release, as their is no way to track whether the person has permission to donate it.. > > Will we have nightly builds in place? I think a 0.1 can get released > without a nightly build, but it would be nice to say that we also have a > "rolling trunk release" which is just the latest build off trunk and the > latest wiki/doc as well. So, some people may want the official 0.1, but > others may want to run straight from trunk/nightly build. > > -- Jack Krupansky > > -Original Message- From: Karl Wright > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 1:56 PM > To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Release? > > Proposal: Release to consist of two things: tar and zip of a complete > source tree, and tar and zip of the modules/dist area after the build. > The implied way people are to work with this is: > > - to use just the distribution, untar or unzip the distribution > zip/tar into a work area, and either use the multiprocess version, or > the quickstart example. > - to add a connector, untar or unzip the source zip/tar into a work > area, and integrate your connector into the build. > > Is this acceptable for a 0.1 release? > > Karl > > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Jack Krupansky > wrote: >> Oh, I wasn't intending to disparage the RSS or other connectors, just >> giving >> my own priority list of "must haves." By all means, the "well-supported" >
Re: Release?
I've created a signing key, and checked in a KEYS file. Apache instructions for this are actually decent, so I didn't have to make much stuff up. Glad about that. Last remaining release issue is getting the release files to a download mirror. Maybe I can find some doc for that too. Karl On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Karl Wright wrote: > The build changes are complete. I removed the modules level from the > hierarchy because it served no useful purpose and complicated matters. > The outer level build.xml now allows you build code, docs, and run > tests separately from one another, and gives you help as a default. > "ant image" builds you the deliverable .zip and tar.gz files. Online > site has been polished so that it now contains complete javadoc, as > does the built and delivered .zip and tar.gz's. In short, we *could* > actually do a release now, if only we had (and incorporated) the KEYS > file I alluded to earlier, which I do not know how to build or obtain. > I believe this needs to be both generated and registered. The site > also needs to refer to a download location/list of mirrors before it > could go out the door. > > Help? Grant? > > Karl > > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >> Hearing nothing, went ahead and made the port of documentation to the >> site official. I also now include the generated site in the release >> tar.gz and .zip. >> Issues still to address before release: >> >> (1) source tar.gz and zip in outer-level build.xml, which I will try >> to address shortly. >> (2) vehicle for release downloads, and naming thereof. In short, >> where do I put these things so people can download them?? >> (3) Voting procedures for release. I've seen this done as a vote in >> gene...@incubator.org - is that actually necessary? >> (4) Release branch and tag. Do we want both? What is the correct >> naming for each in apache? >> (5) Legal requirements. CHANGES.txt, LICENSE.txt, etc. Do these need >> to be included in the release tar.gz, or just the source tar.gz? I >> suspect both, but please confirm. Also, if there is a typical >> organization of the release tar.gz in relation to the source tar.gz >> this would be a good time to make that known. >> >> Thanks, >> Karl >> >> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >>> What I've done here is taken all the pages that I originally put in >>> the Wiki, describing how to set up and run ManifoldCF, and converted >>> them to xdocs that are part of the ManifoldCF site. These documents >>> have no user content other than stuff Grant or I added, according to >>> their logs, so I feel that is safe to do. I've left the wiki pages >>> around but am thinking we'll want them to go away at some point. Not >>> sure exactly what to do with all the user comments to them, however. >>> >>> Is this a reasonable way to proceed? We should avoid using the wiki >>> in the future for documentation, seems to me, but otherwise I can see >>> no issues here. >>> >>> Karl >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Grant Ingersoll >>> wrote: On Nov 15, 2010, at 1:23 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote: > I didn't mean to imply that the wiki needs to be physically included in > the release zip/tar, just that snapshotting and versioning of the wiki > should be done, if feasible, so that a user who is on an older release > can still see the doc for that release. I am just thinking ahead for > future releases. So, 0.1 does not need this right now. Right, and I'm saying that we can't include user generated content in a release unless we have explicitly asked for permission on it in the form of patches and then committed by a committer. Since we don't lock down our wiki, we can't do it. > > -- Jack Krupansky > > -Original Message- From: Grant Ingersoll > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:23 AM > To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Release? > > > On Nov 10, 2010, at 1:22 AM, Jack Krupansky wrote: > >> And the wiki doc is also part of the release. Does this stuff get a >> version/release as well? Presumably we want doc for currently supported >> releases, and the doc can vary between releases. Can we easily snapshot >> the wiki? > > You can't put Wiki in a release, as their is no way to track whether the > person has permission to donate it.. > >> >> Will we have nightly builds in place? I think a 0.1 can get released >> without a nightly build, but it would be nice to say that we also have a >> "rolling trunk release" which is just the latest build off trunk and the >> latest wiki/doc as well. So, some people may want the official 0.1, but >> others may want to run straight from trunk/nightly build. >> >> -- Jack Krupansky >> >> -Original Message- From: Karl Wright >> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 1:56 PM
Re: Release?
The build changes are complete. I removed the modules level from the hierarchy because it served no useful purpose and complicated matters. The outer level build.xml now allows you build code, docs, and run tests separately from one another, and gives you help as a default. "ant image" builds you the deliverable .zip and tar.gz files. Online site has been polished so that it now contains complete javadoc, as does the built and delivered .zip and tar.gz's. In short, we *could* actually do a release now, if only we had (and incorporated) the KEYS file I alluded to earlier, which I do not know how to build or obtain. I believe this needs to be both generated and registered. The site also needs to refer to a download location/list of mirrors before it could go out the door. Help? Grant? Karl On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Karl Wright wrote: > Hearing nothing, went ahead and made the port of documentation to the > site official. I also now include the generated site in the release > tar.gz and .zip. > Issues still to address before release: > > (1) source tar.gz and zip in outer-level build.xml, which I will try > to address shortly. > (2) vehicle for release downloads, and naming thereof. In short, > where do I put these things so people can download them?? > (3) Voting procedures for release. I've seen this done as a vote in > gene...@incubator.org - is that actually necessary? > (4) Release branch and tag. Do we want both? What is the correct > naming for each in apache? > (5) Legal requirements. CHANGES.txt, LICENSE.txt, etc. Do these need > to be included in the release tar.gz, or just the source tar.gz? I > suspect both, but please confirm. Also, if there is a typical > organization of the release tar.gz in relation to the source tar.gz > this would be a good time to make that known. > > Thanks, > Karl > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >> What I've done here is taken all the pages that I originally put in >> the Wiki, describing how to set up and run ManifoldCF, and converted >> them to xdocs that are part of the ManifoldCF site. These documents >> have no user content other than stuff Grant or I added, according to >> their logs, so I feel that is safe to do. I've left the wiki pages >> around but am thinking we'll want them to go away at some point. Not >> sure exactly what to do with all the user comments to them, however. >> >> Is this a reasonable way to proceed? We should avoid using the wiki >> in the future for documentation, seems to me, but otherwise I can see >> no issues here. >> >> Karl >> >> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote: >>> >>> On Nov 15, 2010, at 1:23 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote: >>> I didn't mean to imply that the wiki needs to be physically included in the release zip/tar, just that snapshotting and versioning of the wiki should be done, if feasible, so that a user who is on an older release can still see the doc for that release. I am just thinking ahead for future releases. So, 0.1 does not need this right now. >>> >>> Right, and I'm saying that we can't include user generated content in a >>> release unless we have explicitly asked for permission on it in the form of >>> patches and then committed by a committer. Since we don't lock down our >>> wiki, we can't do it. >>> -- Jack Krupansky -Original Message- From: Grant Ingersoll Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:23 AM To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Release? On Nov 10, 2010, at 1:22 AM, Jack Krupansky wrote: > And the wiki doc is also part of the release. Does this stuff get a > version/release as well? Presumably we want doc for currently supported > releases, and the doc can vary between releases. Can we easily snapshot > the wiki? You can't put Wiki in a release, as their is no way to track whether the person has permission to donate it.. > > Will we have nightly builds in place? I think a 0.1 can get released > without a nightly build, but it would be nice to say that we also have a > "rolling trunk release" which is just the latest build off trunk and the > latest wiki/doc as well. So, some people may want the official 0.1, but > others may want to run straight from trunk/nightly build. > > -- Jack Krupansky > > -Original Message- From: Karl Wright > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 1:56 PM > To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Release? > > Proposal: Release to consist of two things: tar and zip of a complete > source tree, and tar and zip of the modules/dist area after the build. > The implied way people are to work with this is: > > - to use just the distribution, untar or unzip the distribution > zip/tar into a work area, and either use the multiprocess version, or > the quickstart exam
