[VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
18 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

jochen-2
Hi,

I'd like to push out version 3 of the commons-parent project. The
changes in maven-sources-plugin 2.0.3 allow to get rid of the
maven-antrun hack and that's reason enough, IMO.

I'd suggest to take revision 534137, change the version number in 3
and deploy that.

Thanks,

Jochen


[ ] +1
[ ] =0
[ ] -1

--
My cats know that I am a loser who goes out for hunting every day
without ever returning as much as a single mouse. Fortunately, I've
got a wife who's a real champ: She leaves the house and returns within
half an hour, carrying whole bags full of meal.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Niall Pemberton
+1

Niall

On 5/18/07, Jochen Wiedmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'd like to push out version 3 of the commons-parent project. The
> changes in maven-sources-plugin 2.0.3 allow to get rid of the
> maven-antrun hack and that's reason enough, IMO.
>
> I'd suggest to take revision 534137, change the version number in 3
> and deploy that.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jochen
>
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] =0
> [ ] -1

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Torsten Curdt
In reply to this post by jochen-2
Ehm... could we first sort out the repository question I brought  
up? ...and preferably also the related release process?

We should also add the version numbers to the plugins.

I'd say: let's work this out over the weekend and re-start the vote  
in a couple of days.

cheers
--
Torsten

On 18.05.2007, at 09:46, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'd like to push out version 3 of the commons-parent project. The
> changes in maven-sources-plugin 2.0.3 allow to get rid of the
> maven-antrun hack and that's reason enough, IMO.
>
> I'd suggest to take revision 534137, change the version number in 3
> and deploy that.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jochen
>
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] =0
> [ ] -1
>
> --
> My cats know that I am a loser who goes out for hunting every day
> without ever returning as much as a single mouse. Fortunately, I've
> got a wife who's a real champ: She leaves the house and returns within
> half an hour, carrying whole bags full of meal.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

jochen-2
On 5/18/07, Torsten Curdt <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Ehm... could we first sort out the repository question I brought
> up? ...and preferably also the related release process?
>
> We should also add the version numbers to the plugins.
>
> I'd say: let's work this out over the weekend and re-start the vote
> in a couple of days.

I do think, that introducing a new deployment mechanism is a larger
disruption than the changes made so far in 3-SNAPSHOT. In other words,
I'd prefer to see this in a separate release.

Apart from that, what prevents us from publishing version 3 now and a
version 4, if the above questions are resolved? I do not understand
this "oh, just wait until I've got my favourite feature in" whenever
it comes to a release of the commons-parent. This thing doesn't need
exhaustive QA or something like that, and it's not like we weren't
able to manage 12 releases of it every year.


Jochen


--
My cats know that I am a loser who goes out for hunting every day
without ever returning as much as a single mouse. Fortunately, I've
got a wife who's a real champ: She leaves the house and returns within
half an hour, carrying whole bags full of meal.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Torsten Curdt

On 18.05.2007, at 10:44, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:

> On 5/18/07, Torsten Curdt <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Ehm... could we first sort out the repository question I brought
>> up? ...and preferably also the related release process?
>>
>> We should also add the version numbers to the plugins.
>>
>> I'd say: let's work this out over the weekend and re-start the vote
>> in a couple of days.
>
> I do think, that introducing a new deployment mechanism is a larger
> disruption than the changes made so far in 3-SNAPSHOT. In other words,
> I'd prefer to see this in a separate release.
>
> Apart from that, what prevents us from publishing version 3 now and a
> version 4, if the above questions are resolved? I do not understand
> this "oh, just wait until I've got my favourite feature in" whenever
> it comes to a release of the commons-parent. This thing doesn't need
> exhaustive QA or something like that, and it's not like we weren't
> able to manage 12 releases of it every year.

I am with you on the release often ...but I on the other hand  
fixating the
plugin versions and a working release setup is a bit of blocker for  
me ATM.
So if you want to release now - fine. But I'd like to have another  
release
that fixes those things ASAP anyway. So I was just wondering whether  
waiting
a few more days would make such a big difference.

cheers
--
Torsten

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Phil Steitz
On 5/18/07, Torsten Curdt <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 18.05.2007, at 10:44, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>
> > On 5/18/07, Torsten Curdt <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> Ehm... could we first sort out the repository question I brought
> >> up? ...and preferably also the related release process?
> >>
> >> We should also add the version numbers to the plugins.
> >>
> >> I'd say: let's work this out over the weekend and re-start the vote
> >> in a couple of days.
> >
> > I do think, that introducing a new deployment mechanism is a larger
> > disruption than the changes made so far in 3-SNAPSHOT. In other words,
> > I'd prefer to see this in a separate release.
> >
> > Apart from that, what prevents us from publishing version 3 now and a
> > version 4, if the above questions are resolved? I do not understand
> > this "oh, just wait until I've got my favourite feature in" whenever
> > it comes to a release of the commons-parent. This thing doesn't need
> > exhaustive QA or something like that, and it's not like we weren't
> > able to manage 12 releases of it every year.
>
> I am with you on the release often ...but I on the other hand
> fixating the
> plugin versions and a working release setup is a bit of blocker for
> me ATM.
> So if you want to release now - fine. But I'd like to have another
> release
> that fixes those things ASAP anyway. So I was just wondering whether
> waiting
> a few more days would make such a big difference.

I agree that we need to specify the plugin versions.  If not in the
parent, then the individual poms are going to have to do it (in which
case, I don't know if there is value in specifying things in the
parent.  Could be ignorance here - are the plugin settings merged
somehow?) The important requirement IMO is that anything that we
release has a (perpetually) repeatable source build, both from the
source distro and the svn tag.  If we release something that has only
an m2 build and does not specify plugin versions, we risk breaking
that.

Phil

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Jörg Schaible
Phil Steitz wrote:

> On 5/18/07, Torsten Curdt <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 18.05.2007, at 10:44, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>>
>> > On 5/18/07, Torsten Curdt <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ehm... could we first sort out the repository question I brought
>> >> up? ...and preferably also the related release process?
>> >>
>> >> We should also add the version numbers to the plugins.
>> >>
>> >> I'd say: let's work this out over the weekend and re-start the vote
>> >> in a couple of days.
>> >
>> > I do think, that introducing a new deployment mechanism is a larger
>> > disruption than the changes made so far in 3-SNAPSHOT. In other words,
>> > I'd prefer to see this in a separate release.
>> >
>> > Apart from that, what prevents us from publishing version 3 now and a
>> > version 4, if the above questions are resolved? I do not understand
>> > this "oh, just wait until I've got my favourite feature in" whenever
>> > it comes to a release of the commons-parent. This thing doesn't need
>> > exhaustive QA or something like that, and it's not like we weren't
>> > able to manage 12 releases of it every year.
>>
>> I am with you on the release often ...but I on the other hand
>> fixating the
>> plugin versions and a working release setup is a bit of blocker for
>> me ATM.
>> So if you want to release now - fine. But I'd like to have another
>> release
>> that fixes those things ASAP anyway. So I was just wondering whether
>> waiting
>> a few more days would make such a big difference.
>
> I agree that we need to specify the plugin versions.  If not in the
> parent, then the individual poms are going to have to do it (in which
> case, I don't know if there is value in specifying things in the
> parent.  Could be ignorance here - are the plugin settings merged
> somehow?) The important requirement IMO is that anything that we
> release has a (perpetually) repeatable source build, both from the
> source distro and the svn tag.  If we release something that has only
> an m2 build and does not specify plugin versions, we risk breaking
> that.

Right. Therefore we need to nail down the plugin versions. And yes, the
settings from the pluginManagement in the parent is inherited. But
remember, currently you also need the exactly same Maven version to repeat
a build. This will get better with newer versions, but currently this still
applies.

- Jörg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Phil Steitz
On 5/20/07, Jörg Schaible <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Phil Steitz wrote:
>
> > On 5/18/07, Torsten Curdt <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 18.05.2007, at 10:44, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 5/18/07, Torsten Curdt <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Ehm... could we first sort out the repository question I brought
> >> >> up? ...and preferably also the related release process?
> >> >>
> >> >> We should also add the version numbers to the plugins.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'd say: let's work this out over the weekend and re-start the vote
> >> >> in a couple of days.
> >> >
> >> > I do think, that introducing a new deployment mechanism is a larger
> >> > disruption than the changes made so far in 3-SNAPSHOT. In other words,
> >> > I'd prefer to see this in a separate release.
> >> >
> >> > Apart from that, what prevents us from publishing version 3 now and a
> >> > version 4, if the above questions are resolved? I do not understand
> >> > this "oh, just wait until I've got my favourite feature in" whenever
> >> > it comes to a release of the commons-parent. This thing doesn't need
> >> > exhaustive QA or something like that, and it's not like we weren't
> >> > able to manage 12 releases of it every year.
> >>
> >> I am with you on the release often ...but I on the other hand
> >> fixating the
> >> plugin versions and a working release setup is a bit of blocker for
> >> me ATM.
> >> So if you want to release now - fine. But I'd like to have another
> >> release
> >> that fixes those things ASAP anyway. So I was just wondering whether
> >> waiting
> >> a few more days would make such a big difference.
> >
> > I agree that we need to specify the plugin versions.  If not in the
> > parent, then the individual poms are going to have to do it (in which
> > case, I don't know if there is value in specifying things in the
> > parent.  Could be ignorance here - are the plugin settings merged
> > somehow?) The important requirement IMO is that anything that we
> > release has a (perpetually) repeatable source build, both from the
> > source distro and the svn tag.  If we release something that has only
> > an m2 build and does not specify plugin versions, we risk breaking
> > that.
>
> Right. Therefore we need to nail down the plugin versions. And yes, the
> settings from the pluginManagement in the parent is inherited.

Should have been more clear in my question.  If you partially
configure a plugin in the parent,  can you then just add stuff, such
as the version, in a child without repeating the things specified in
the parent config?  If the answer to that is "no" then there is no
value in partially configuring plugins in the parent.

Phil

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Wendy Smoak
On 5/20/07, Phil Steitz <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Should have been more clear in my question.  If you partially
> configure a plugin in the parent,  can you then just add stuff, such
> as the version, in a child without repeating the things specified in
> the parent config?  If the answer to that is "no" then there is no
> value in partially configuring plugins in the parent.

At a minimum, the parent would only mention the plugin version numbers
in <pluginManagement>.  That's what will pin the plugin version number
and increase the likelyhood of having reproducible builds.

<pluginManagement> only "kicks in" when a child project uses the
plugin, either with a declaration in <plugins><plugin> or using the
defaults without configuration.  (For example, the 'clean' plugin
usually isn't configured.)

If the project wants a different plugin version, then it can specify
that in <plugins><plugin> along with any project-specific
configuration.  The important part is that the version number is
configured somewhere in the pom hierarchy, rather than depending on
the latest release which could change.

You can also put configuration in <plugins><plugin> in the parent pom
that will be inherited, but only things that are common to all
projects should go there.

--
Wendy

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Jörg Schaible-2
In reply to this post by jochen-2
Hi Phil,

Phil Steitz wrote on Sunday, May 20, 2007 5:53 PM:

> On 5/20/07, Jörg Schaible <[hidden email]> wrote:

[snip]

>> Right. Therefore we need to nail down the plugin versions. And yes,
>> the settings from the pluginManagement in the parent is inherited.
>
> Should have been more clear in my question.  If you partially
> configure a plugin in the parent,  can you then just add stuff, such
> as the version, in a child without repeating the things specified in
> the parent config?  If the answer to that is "no" then there is no
> value in partially configuring plugins in the parent.

Configuration is merged from pluginDependency and plugins defined directly in the build section. Unfortunately it is not merged for plugins in the report section (which prevents setting source version for javadoc plugin in the configurtation of the parent anhd set individual links to external javadocs in the projcets).

- Jörg

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

jochen-2
I don't know how to deal with this thread.

The discussion was related to further improvement of the
commons-parent. IMO, this is far from blocking the proposed release.
(As I wrote, in particular in the case of the commons-parent, nothing
prevents us from further releases real soon, if the discussed
improvements have been made.) Nevertheless, only Niall confirmed a
release.

Jochen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Torsten Curdt
I did not have the time to fix it in the parent ...but I don't want  
to block anything.
Release often ;) ...for now I've changed the things I need in the jci  
pom itself.

So just let's do it. Here is my

+1

cheers
--
Torsten

On 29.05.2007, at 02:59, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:

> I don't know how to deal with this thread.
>
> The discussion was related to further improvement of the
> commons-parent. IMO, this is far from blocking the proposed release.
> (As I wrote, in particular in the case of the commons-parent, nothing
> prevents us from further releases real soon, if the discussed
> improvements have been made.) Nevertheless, only Niall confirmed a
> release.
>
> Jochen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Rahul Akolkar
In reply to this post by jochen-2
On 5/18/07, Jochen Wiedmann <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to push out version 3 of the commons-parent project. The
> changes in maven-sources-plugin 2.0.3 allow to get rid of the
> maven-antrun hack and that's reason enough, IMO.
>
<snip/>
>
> [X] +1
> [ ] =0
> [ ] -1
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Dennis Lundberg-2
In reply to this post by jochen-2
I have a couple of changes that I'd like to get in before the release:

1. Remove the build/pluginManagement sections from the profiles, as
those are not needed. These were added after the last release, when
Niall updated to the newer sources plugin.

2. Lock down the version for the javadoc and jxr plugins

I'll hold my commit until I get someones approval, as this is an ongoing
vote.


I volunteer to do the actual release of the pom.


Jochen Wiedmann wrote:

> I don't know how to deal with this thread.
>
> The discussion was related to further improvement of the
> commons-parent. IMO, this is far from blocking the proposed release.
> (As I wrote, in particular in the case of the commons-parent, nothing
> prevents us from further releases real soon, if the discussed
> improvements have been made.) Nevertheless, only Niall confirmed a
> release.
>
> Jochen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


--
Dennis Lundberg

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

jochen-2
On 5/29/07, Dennis Lundberg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 1. Remove the build/pluginManagement sections from the profiles, as
> those are not needed. These were added after the last release, when
> Niall updated to the newer sources plugin.
>
> 2. Lock down the version for the javadoc and jxr plugins
>
> I'll hold my commit until I get someones approval, as this is an ongoing
> vote.
>
>
> I volunteer to do the actual release of the pom.

If we can do that quick and you're holding the next vote, then I'd be
+1 for both. My main target is to have a version of the pom which
makes use of the sources plugin 2.0.3.

Jochen



--
Women have the ability to wind you round their little finger.
Daughters can use all of the fingers together.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Torsten Curdt

On 29.05.2007, at 23:22, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:

> On 5/29/07, Dennis Lundberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> 1. Remove the build/pluginManagement sections from the profiles, as
>> those are not needed. These were added after the last release, when
>> Niall updated to the newer sources plugin.
>>
>> 2. Lock down the version for the javadoc and jxr plugins

+1 for both

>> I'll hold my commit until I get someones approval, as this is an  
>> ongoing
>> vote.

Who is supposed to approve? :)

>> I volunteer to do the actual release of the pom.
>
> If we can do that quick and you're holding the next vote, then I'd be
> +1 for both. My main target is to have a version of the pom which
> makes use of the sources plugin 2.0.3.

I say go for it!

<rant>
I think we need to establish a little bit more of an agile edge here  
at commons. Boy we suck at release votes.
</rant>

/me ducks

cheers
--
Torsten

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

jochen-2
> <rant>
> I think we need to establish a little bit more of an agile edge here
> at commons. Boy we suck at release votes.
> </rant>

+1     I surely hope that the proposed chair has an eye on it. :-)

--
Women have the ability to wind you round their little finger.
Daughters can use all of the fingers together.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 3

Dennis Lundberg-2
In reply to this post by Torsten Curdt
Torsten Curdt wrote:

<snip>

> <rant>
> I think we need to establish a little bit more of an agile edge here at
> commons. Boy we suck at release votes.
> </rant>
>
> /me ducks
>
> cheers
> --
> Torsten

I agree with you on that.

--
Dennis Lundberg

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]