I have signed the tag:
See
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.4.0
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.4.0
I’ve also build the updatesite ready to be published:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ant/ivyde/updatesite/ivy-2.4.0.final_20141213170938/
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ant/ivyde/updatesite/ivy-2.4.0.final_20141213170938/
And I’ve pushed the jars to the Nexus staging repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheant-1006/
So I think we’re good. For now we have one -1 and three +1 (including me).
I’ll keep the vote open a couple of days, to be sure everyone had the time to
vote. And I’ll promote the artifacts.
Nicolas
Le 17 déc. 2014 à 14:25, Nicolas Lalevée nicolas.lale...@hibnet.org a écrit
:
Le 17 déc. 2014 à 04:09, Antoine Levy Lambert anto...@gmx.de a écrit :
Nicolas, Jean-Louis, what are your thoughts ?
The problem reported by Stefan with the ivy.xml in the source archive must
be caused by something in the build process replacing the ivy.xml of the
source tree with an expanded version of the same file generated when the
ivy:publish/ task runs ?
The purpose of this change is that it fixes the dependencies of Ivy. I see no
particular harm here.
But as Stefan, generally speaking, I prefer the source release to be an
extract of the source repository. So there is no possible confusion.
I guess a minor edit in the build file to make this modified version of
ivy.xml go somewhere under the build folder should address this issue for
this release and the next ones.
I have not spent myself a lot of time on ivy yet but I would like to spend
some in 2015 - or maybe even next week if my kids are busy out of the house …
I also know how it feels when one creates a release candidate and some minor
problems are found and one has to again go through 20 steps in a
ReleaseInstructions document …
Actually releasing Ivy is quite straight forward, no issues with that.
See: http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/trunk/dev/makerelease.html
http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/trunk/dev/makerelease.html
Probably the signing of the artifacts can be more automatic. I have seen
there is ant target for that but I haven’t tested it yet.
What trouble me more is what is the exact process to push artifacts into
Maven repo after the release. And we’ll need to figure out how to push it
into the Eclipse updatesite too.
But I am sure we will get there finally.
I am sure too. We have to either be patient or actively act on it, depending
on our available time.
On Dec 14, 2014, at 5:43 AM, Stefan Bodewig bode...@apache.org wrote:
We should be using signed tags (git tag -s or -u) rather than
lightweight tags for releases. I know we haven't cut any releases from
git so far, so we'll be learning as we go along.
I do not know how it works, but I’ll figure it out. And update the release
documentation.
Nicolas
