Re: Progress towards a release

Thomas Vandahl wrote:
> Scott Eade wrote:
>   
>>    * We need to build the release.  Does someone want to volunteer to
>>      be the release manager?  Knowledge of this process is the main
>>      thing that has been holding back jcs releases in the past.  I
>>      suggest that we allow someone with the necessary knowledge perform
>>      this role for the proposed release, but they keep the list
>>      informed of the tasks that are done so that others can do this in
>>      the future.
>>     
>
> Ok, if nobody else steps up, I'll do it. Should be less work than a
> Torque release. My guideline always has been
> http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/releases/index.html and I hope this
> applies here as well.
>
> I will be using the maven1 build as far as possible. I'm not quite sure
> what the vote-after-release policy really means so I propose to cut an
> RC, put it on people.apache.org somewhere, vote on it and re-brand it as
> 1.3.0 if everything is ok. Is that the way o go?
>   
There has been a discussion concerning "vote-after-release" (more 
correctly labelled "voting on artificats, the not the state of the 
tree") on jakarta-general over the last day or so.  Because various 
artefacts get embedded in jars, gz files, etc., I am inclined to agree 
with  Henri's approach which would be to actually build 1.3 final  (as 
opposed to 1.3-rc1) and deploy it to your ~tv site on people.apache.org 
- when the vote concludes it can then just be moved as is without any 
need to do renames that might impact checksums and whatnot.  If re were 
building a release candidate we would do the same thing with -rc*, but 
in this case I believe the right thing to do is to go straight to a 
final release.  My justification for this is that a number of us are 
running the trunk code in production systems currently and there have 
been no changes that are revolutionary in nature over the last few months.

Thanks for taking on this task Thomas.

Scott