incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Joo <hblz...@163.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC3]
Date Tue, 21 Aug 2018 02:48:01 GMT
hi,


I suggest the next iteration of development should be on another branch such as "2.6.4" or
"2.6.x".
We indeed should keep the pre-release branch clean (I just do some local work changing versions
for our own nexus repo before).

best regards,

Jason

> On Aug 20, 2018, at 11:02, Jun Liu <liujun@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> The 2.6.3 tag does not agree with the source release. This is a
>> significant issue and enough for me to vote against the release. A diff
>> shows most (all?) of the pom.xml have a version of "2.6.4-SNAPSHOT" in
>> the tag but "2.6.3" in the source release.
>> 
>> I dug into this a little. At first I thought the tag / commit in the
>> vote was wrong. It is. But is isn't just that. If I go back to
>> 
>> a8be0eaaddab198ed03b0150d4db03e2b22f023f
>> 
>> things are better but:
>> a) there are still differences
>> b) the tag includes multiple commits after this point
> 
> Thanks for your feedback, Mark, I have double checked the version mismatch problem and
it does exist.
> 
> Despite that all files except for the pom version are the same, I agree it’s still
an issue that needs revoting. It will confuse developers when trying to rebuild from the tag.
The root problem is more about a package or upload problem than a technical problem. We used
maven-release-plugin to prepare for the release, which has changed the pom version to ‘2.6.4-SNAPSHOT’
since RC1, I remember to change to 2.6.3 before tagging in RC2 but forget to do that in this
round. 
> 
> I think we should build a release script to automate the whole release process to avoid
this kind of problems.
> 
> Best regards,
> Jun
> 
>> On 18 Aug 2018, at 05:56, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> On 12/08/18 08:12, Jun Liu wrote:
>> 
>> <snip/>
>> 
>>> Please vote accordingly:
>>> [ ] +1 approve 
>>> [ ] +0 no opinion 
>>> [X] -1 disapprove with the reason (binding)
>> 
>> The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
>> hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. Can be
>> addressed in the next release.
>> 
>> I'd expect the files to be named "apache-dubbo..." not "dubbo...". Nice
>> to have (not all Apache projects use this naming convention). Something
>> to consider for the next release.
>> 
>> Consider including mvnw and mvnw.cmd in the source release so it is
>> simpler to get started with the build from a source release.
>> 
>> The 2.6.3 tag does not agree with the source release. This is a
>> significant issue and enough for me to vote against the release. A diff
>> shows most (all?) of the pom.xml have a version of "2.6.4-SNAPSHOT" in
>> the tag but "2.6.3" in the source release.
>> 
>> I dug into this a little. At first I thought the tag / commit in the
>> vote was wrong. It is. But is isn't just that. If I go back to
>> 
>> a8be0eaaddab198ed03b0150d4db03e2b22f023f
>> 
>> things are better but:
>> a) there are still differences
>> b) the tag includes multiple commits after this point
>> 
>> 
>> Mark
> 


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message