http://people.apache.org/~jross/quirk/20140822/
Here's another iteration. Changes include the following. - Removed .revision files - Removed the perftests binary - Added .md5 and .sha checksums Justin On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote: > On 20 August 2014 10:04, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 19 August 2014 22:47, Justin Ross <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> Here's a preview of what I've got going. This example run is against > >> trunk, but the same structure would be reflected into 0.30. Note that > the > >> dispatch and proton artifacts get removed before doing the "Qpid" > release. > >> > >> http://people.apache.org/~jross/quirk/20140819/ > >> http://people.apache.org/~jross/quirk/20140819/java-binaries/ > >> > >> I added qpid-qmf2, Fraser's stuff; I'm thinking about renaming the > archive > >> to qpid-java-qmf-tools. > > > > > > Yeah, its a bit annoying to name, and not aided by the existing artifact > > names. > > > > > >> Correspondingly, the python tools archive is back > >> to being just python code > >> > >> The java binaries are now precisely the same as "mvn package" generates. > >> > > > > Great > > > > > >> These include websocket and perftests binaries that no one has yet > >> expressed a desire for. > >> > > > > If we distribute the client websocket plugin, we should update the broker > > to depend on it so its binary includes the matching broker plugin. I'll > do > > that now. > > > > I'd be fine without the perftests binary being included. We have never > > distributed it in the past, and the maven build is currently set not to > > deploy any of the output for that module as a result, which we should > > perhaps change if we want to begin distributing it on the site. It is > only > > being built because the old Ant build system had an optional way to do > so, > > and in the end I tied it to the package phase for consistency with the > > other modules. I did consider leaving it requiring a more typical > explicit > > "mvn assembly:single" invocation to create that archive, saving the > > precious ~0.x seconds and additional storage during the build process ;) > > > > I also meant to mention the .revision files. Are we going to distribute all > of those at the end? I know we had a '.svnversion' file in the past, though > having a quick peek I dont see any other Apache projects which do that, but > having one of them per archive makes things seem a bit cluttered somehow. > > That said, the same quick peek also made me realise everyone else does > per-archive .md5 and .sha1 files which we never have, instead having a > single SHA1SUM file containing all the hashes. That file seems to have > dissappeared, which we should probably address (possibly by doing what > everyone else seems to?). > > Robbie >
