ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gintautas Grigelionis <>
Subject Re: Ant Release Process
Date Fri, 12 Jan 2018 17:30:41 GMT
I was looking at build files in Ivy project, and realised that Ivy was
using Commons OpenPGP as well.
It's still there in the build files, but it's not used in publishing/upload
after signers were introduced;
only for signing the distribution archives. The question, naturally, is
whether it makes sense to add
distributions to ivy.xml file as a separate conf and use a filesystem
resolver to sign and compute
checksums for them, too.


2017-12-28 18:38 GMT+01:00 Gintautas Grigelionis <>:

> Hello,
> I am proposing to rip off Maven Ant tasks (for reasons described in the
> discussion to PR)
> and Commons OpenPGP (correspondingly, fetch and signit for brevity). Ivy
> can do all of that,
> and it is already used by upload. The bonus is, using Ivy properly would
> simplify project
> setup in IDE and showcase Ivy.
> The fetch part raises questions of what the baseline should be. My
> proposal is to use the
> latest third party libraries available as allowed by the chosen JRE
> (unless there are good
> reasons to not doing that -- like 20+ dependencies in JRuby 1.7 or 9).
> The signit part is partly a question of automation (fetch touches upon
> that, too; see step 3
> in the release process) and partly of documenting the artifacts that are
> part of a release.
> Use of Ivy signer makes step 10 redundant and simplifies ivy.xml; I
> suggested adding
> distrib artifacts to ivy.xml and using a filesystem resolver with a signer
> to copy the
> artifacts to Subversion in step 17.
> Gintas
> 2017-12-28 17:32 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig <>:
>> Hi
>> over in Gintas is proposing to
>> automate some of the steps needed to cut a release of Ant that so far
>> have been performed manually. He's also ripping out the maven Ant task
>> stuff from fetch.xml and replacing it with Ivy, but that seems to be a
>> separate issue, it is just that automation becomes easier once fetch is
>> based on Ivy. At least that's my understanding of the situation, please
>> correct me if I'm wrong, Gintas.
>> For the last few releases I have been the release manager but this will
>> not always be the case so it won't be a good idea if I enforce my taste
>> here. In particular as I seem to be willing to suffer more than many
>> other people cutting releases - judging from the moaning about the
>> release process in Commons which involves far fewer steps than cutting a
>> release of Ant.
>> I'd ask you to look through the Release Process description[1] and look
>> for things that can and should be automated - assuming we can find a
>> reliable solution. Personally I prefer to stay in control at every
>> single step but maybe my level of paranoia is just wrong here.
>> Cheers
>>         Stefan
>> [1]
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:

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