On 1/24/07, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 24, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On 1/24/07, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> ...Yonik/Hoss, others - what do you think should be done to make
>> releases?...
>
> If you mean an actual release (defined in [1] as "any publication
> outside the group of people on the product dev list"), the PMC must
> vote to approve it, and it must comply with the ASF licensing
> requirements (LICENSE and NOTICE files, etc). And it should be
> mirrored, dunno how this would work for Ruby packages? So some
> bureaucracy would be involved I guess.
>
> Release candidates are much more lightweight according to [1]. IIUC,
> putting up a gem package as you mention fits that definition, so that
> might be a good way of getting your stuff tested.
Yes, definitely this is a "release candidate". Thanks for the info.
I'll review the link you sent and update the codebase with any
missing pieces, and any other recommendations on this thread before
"releasing".
I would think we could set up a nightly build to go to
people.apache.org/builds/lucene/solr/solrb/nightly
and perhaps release candidates could go in
people.apache.org/builds/lucene/solr/solrb/
-Yonik
