From general-return-50288-apmail-incubator-general-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Fri Jul 17 10:09:49 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7D3B517BAD for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:09:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 28058 invoked by uid 500); 17 Jul 2015 10:09:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 27868 invoked by uid 500); 17 Jul 2015 10:09:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 27855 invoked by uid 99); 17 Jul 2015 10:09:48 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:09:48 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 1F396D55A3 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:09:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.121 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.121 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd1-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-eu-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CafATottj-YR for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:09:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com [209.85.212.169]) by mx1-eu-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-eu-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id D7CC5205B1 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:09:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wibud3 with SMTP id ud3so38514834wib.0 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 03:09:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=e1DnPBBvz+u6tZpU3AswGMBBUDyYID6RVCak7XRy+s4=; b=GaJYzj/4nZ/JREtlUSa7go1sXBBlwtbWBrYjsqfsDTpWf68qxNqwKp0LJqiL6nR2NK qkFZFYuv9x9CC0wwpx2ID7WwOf/0Vw3OSDSvvqguTIpdwQMai7+qeZAlDRcmM2XTCCQY n9hcLXCmrWvWWmagIz6Ugz4fcgdrfGjfc7BpqiEI/a5gIuPlmG4CzeoaYAeVixBcnxeN iqkR1Jo3Q2lES6vYxSieVP/0hRl709a1opnbRVa2oWuzFu26vL3qrR/CMaqoqPpqMZ0N RyufpFsKCQKIcgO0QdLpYfUNuYVHrqhLTnTXqMJPrms/OCf7NN2yAwyjaLhTzxIzKcmH B/8Q== X-Received: by 10.180.109.136 with SMTP id hs8mr15433491wib.73.1437127786560; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 03:09:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.29] (i19-les01-ix2-212-195-127-200.sfr.lns.abo.bbox.fr. [212.195.127.200]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id e7sm7726312wib.22.2015.07.17.03.09.44 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 17 Jul 2015 03:09:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <55A8D463.4000500@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 12:09:39 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?RW1tYW51ZWwgTMOpY2hhcm55?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating References: <4C228491-AED5-45BF-9359-991A7E96D750@classsoftware.com> <55A76F95.2040208@gmail.com> <55A8AF35.9060601@gmail.com> <55A8D2AB.5070106@gmx.org> In-Reply-To: <55A8D2AB.5070106@gmx.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Le 17/07/15 12:02, Jochen Theodorou a =C3=A9crit : > Am 17.07.2015 09:31, schrieb Emmanuel L=C3=A9charny: > [...] >> Now, I'm a bit scared : why the hell can't we make it easier to cut a >> release at Apache for this project ? I mean, the infrastructure should= >> not be a limitation here : we do have a CI, we most certainly can tune= >> it to fit Groovy. > > that would not change anything. What makes things complicated is > points of human interaction in the middle of the release process. That > won't be different with a better tuned CI I'm puzzled. C=C3=A9dric said in a previous mail that before being an Apa= che podling, releasing was just a matter of a couple of hours and very few human interaction. What makes it so more complex in an Apache environemen= t ? > > [...] >> I'd like to remember everyone that each project is quite able to defin= e >> the way they do things, as soon as they fits in the Apache process, >> which is not that rigid. > > Not as rigid... on this list it has been made clear, that anything > that is even remotely something like a release is to be handled as > such. Furthermore, it was made clear, that third parties are supposed > to be prevented to provide their own releases, even if it means to use > the brand to force things. Even maven central is seen as evil in that > sense. And of course any apache member is not allowed to do some kind > f release on its own. This is just to give an example of the things > that accompany the process. And those are rigid already. Let me be clear : I'm cutting releases for years on Apache projects. The process is quite simple : - I use Maven *locally*. When the release is completed, I just have to close the staging repository on Nexus, and push the packages on dist. Nothing that can't be done automatically, except closing the repository - last, not least, I stage the release on nexus. Tell me what's different for Groovy, that requires much more manual processing ? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org