E ; Andrew Grimberg
; Coquelin, Sebastien
; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] Staging repo in settings.xml
In terms of support I think we will support a small number of version
combinations. In a sense cutting a release just becomes the act of blessing a
Manifesto and
version
>> numbers and release cycles per project or even per jar file. For reference,
>> Open-O decided on the former in order to minimize support and maintenance
>> costs.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gary
>>
>>
>> From: Closset, Christophe [mailt
Behalf Of Gary Wu
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 7:05 PM
To: SPATSCHECK, OLIVER
Cc: onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] Staging repo in settings.xml
Hi Oliver,
There are definitely disadvantages to keeping all versions in sync, as you
mentioned.
I think the main issue to
Andrew Grimberg
; Coquelin, Sebastien
; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] Staging repo in settings.xml
Gary,
thanks for the summary.
I would NOT try to keep the version numbers in sync. Either way creates work
and I believe keeping them in sync creates much more work.
E.g.
imberg
>
> Cc: Gary Wu ; Coquelin, Sebastien
> ; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
> Subject: RE: [onap-discuss] Staging repo in settings.xml
>
> I’ll set up a call to discuss this further.
>
> I think we need to have a TSC decision on :
> - Do we want to freeze artifa
y 29, 2017 6:22 AM
To: SPATSCHECK, OLIVER ; Andrew Grimberg
Cc: Gary Wu ; Coquelin, Sebastien
; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Subject: RE: [onap-discuss] Staging repo in settings.xml
I’ll set up a call to discuss this further.
I think we need to have a TSC decision on :
- Do we want to fr
2:19 PM
To: Andrew Grimberg
Cc: Gary Wu ; Coquelin, Sebastien
; Closset, Christophe ;
onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] Staging repo in settings.xml
Would have to talk to all the teams to get the details but I think most
artifacts need to be locked down. Please remember
Would have to talk to all the teams to get the details but I think most
artifacts need to be locked down. Please remember that since we created the
1.0.0 branch we have been contributing code based on two additional internal
releases into the seed repos. This new code base has not been fully te
On 05/25/2017 02:36 PM, Gary Wu wrote:
> That makes sense given that staging artifacts were supposed to exist
> only long enough to decide whether they're good to release or not;
> they were not meant to be used as long-lived build dependencies.
>
> I think the right thing to do is to move away fr
OLIVER (OLIVER) ; Gary Wu
Cc: Coquelin, Sebastien ; CLOSSET, CHRISTOPHE
; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] Staging repo in settings.xml
On 05/24/2017 11:34 AM, SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER) wrote:
>
>> On May 24, 2017, at 10:54 AM EDT, Gary Wu
>> wrote:
>>
On 05/24/2017 11:34 AM, SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER) wrote:
>
>> On May 24, 2017, at 10:54 AM EDT, Gary Wu
>> wrote:
>>
>> 3) I understand that all the staging process was meant to be
>> temporary, and to add on Gary’s last question, what is the plan
>> moving forward and how could we contribut
> On May 24, 2017, at 10:54 AM EDT, Gary Wu wrote:
>
> 3) I understand that all the staging process was meant to be temporary, and
> to add on Gary’s last question, what is the plan moving forward and how could
> we contribute to that effort ?
I think that’s a TSC question. We wouldn’t mind
ubject: Re: [onap-discuss] Staging repo in settings.xml
Hi Christophe, Gary, Andy,
I’m trying also to build projects on a local Jenkins and I’m facing some issues
related to the nexus-staging-maven-plugin.
I am reaching out to clarify a few things :
1) On the nexus-staging-maven-plugin document
5:52 AM
To: Gary Wu ; Andrew Grimberg
; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Subject: RE: [onap-discuss] Staging repo in settings.xml
Hi Gary, Andy,
As for the OpenECOMP history, the whole original idea was also to align
everyone's release number and date to a common one
t: RE: [onap-discuss] Staging repo in settings.xml
Hi Gary, Andy,
As for the OpenECOMP history, the whole original idea was also to align
everyone's release number and date to a common one for the launch (the current
release-1.0.0 branch).
Concerns were raised in the dev teams (as you poi
ing this I
believe.
Regards
Christophe
-Original Message-
From: onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org
[mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Gary Wu
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 12:29 AM
To: Andrew Grimberg ; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] Staging repo
ailto:agrimb...@linuxfoundation.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 1:17 PM
To: Gary Wu ; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] Staging repo in settings.xml
On 05/10/2017 02:05 PM, Gary Wu wrote:
> What's the rationale behind including Staging in the global
> settings.xml
On 05/10/2017 02:05 PM, Gary Wu wrote:
> What's the rationale behind including Staging in the global
> settings.xml? This seems unorthodox.
>
> I have now observed instances (e.g. sdnc/core, mso) where a clean
> build in a local environment will fail unless Staging is included in
> local settings
Hi Andy,
What's the rationale behind including Staging in the global settings.xml? This
seems unorthodox.
I have now observed instances (e.g. sdnc/core, mso) where a clean build in a
local environment will fail unless Staging is included in local settings.xml.
This is because there are snaps
19 matches
Mail list logo
