| Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [External] : Re: : Re: : Re: Pushing RCx or Mx to maven central |
And also noting -- if any of the formal specification objects do not become final, any certification request against that prospective release cannot be approved. (We don't approve certification requests against non normative (final) artifacts.)
If there is ambiguity about what is and isn't normative and what is or isn't allowed to be certified, then we need to correct that.
-- Ed
Hi,
We have the Jakarta Staging Repository set up to address the chicken-and-egg situation. Here is how we have done it in the past:1) Spec projects publish final version of the API to Jakarta Staging Repository (this repo has extended timeout for artifacts of 2 months)
2) Implementations build based of the final versions APIs in Jakarta Staging Repository
3) Implementation publishes their RC impl to their location of choice
4) WG submits ballot that points to one or more compatible implementations that pass the final TCK
5) Spec projects releases final APIs from Jakarta Staging Repository to maven central from after ballot is approved
6) Implementation projects build off final APIs and release final implementations at their leisure.
The only difference from the steps Thomas wrote is that it can be the final versions that are staged and used as basis for the implementations. The staging repository has extended the timeout to 2 months for this purpose.
Ivar
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:04 PM Nathan Rauh <nathan.rauh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Don't consider anything I have said to be a statement of what the Eclipse processes require or permit. When I said it didn't sound like a legitimate way to determine a compatible implementation, that's only my own opinion of what I think seems to be the right way to go about things independent of what the processes permit. I should have been clear on that, or better yet never have offered that opinion at all. What I said is not intended to be and is not a valid interpretation of the Eclipse process, as pointed out by Mike Milinkovich and others. The real focus here should be on the apparent disconnect in the process that Tom Watson brings up which we don't know how to get past in order to make a final release.
From: "Lukas Jungmann" <lukas.jungmann@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 01/13/2022 10:53 AM
Subject: Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [External] : Re: : Re: Pushing RCx or Mx to maven central
Sent by: "jakartaee-platform-dev" <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On 1/13/22 4:35 PM, Nathan Rauh wrote:
> If the purpose of the Release Candidate or Milestone driver is to enable
> the certification of a compatible implementation of the spec so that you
> can release your spec, then the Release Candidate or Milestone driver
> really needs to be available from a permanent location like maven, not a
> temporary staging repo. It isn't acceptable to be telling potential
> compatible implementations to produce alpha or beta releases of their
> own product based upon an artifact from a temporary staging location
> that will disappear.
After reading https://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/#6_4_Releases
what do you suggest so it adheres to it and complies with EFSP?
Given that we are asking these products to provide
> compatible implementations of our specification for our own benefit
> (verifying that our specs are ready for final release), we owe it to
> them to provide Release Candidate or Milestone artifacts that are
> product-ready and product-worthy to be picked up and consumed by their
> users. This includes the artifacts remaining available and not going away.
most projects do not change their RC/M/final builds once they are in
staging, even though it is not guaranteed, and publish them in central
as soon as they can (when their dependencies got necessary approvals and
are made available in central). One should talk to the particular
project if (s)he sees its RC/M/final builds being changed in staging;
usually there is a good reason behind it, such as found test/TCK
failures in final builds etc.
thanks,
--lukas
>
>
>
>
> From: "Tibor Digana" <tibordigana@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "jakartaee-platform developer discussions"
> <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 01/13/2022 06:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [External] : Re: Pushing RCx or Mx
> to maven central
> Sent by: "jakartaee-platform-dev"
> <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> The main purpose of Nexus Staging Repo is internal within the
> Jakarta organization and it is mainly testing purposes in the Q/A team,
> and so the staging repo is temporal and has only a time limited life
> cycle. If we make a decision regarding ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
> *This Message Is From an External Sender *
>
> This message came from outside your organization.
>
>
> ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
> The main purpose of Nexus Staging Repo is internal within the
> Jakarta organization and it is mainly testing purposes in the Q/A team,
> and so the staging repo is temporal and has only a time limited life cycle.
> If we make a decision regarding the staging repos, we would have
> problems with the arguments that these repos have been deleted at some time.
> Additionally, the names of staging repos are not general per Spec. They
> are not named like "BVAL". Their name has a postfix number been
> automatically generated by the staging server, e.g.
> BVAL-236289, BVAL-04832662 etc, and the list of staging repos in the
> server would be large and totally messy for the customer in order to
> understand which one should be picked up and which one is related to Git
> commit or Jira ticket.
>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 12:31 PM Lukas Jungmann
> <_lukas.jungmann@oracle.com_ <mailto:lukas.jungmann@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> On 1/13/22 12:06 PM, Emily Jiang via jakartaee-platform-dev wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>> Can you explain why you think the artifacts should not be pushed to
>> maven central? One of the reasons for pushing the artifacts to maven
>> central is to make it easier for others to access the artifacts and then
>> provide feedback. If all of the artifacts are in staging, only the
>> projects under EE4J can access them freely, which creates a barrier for
>> other projects to obtain these artifacts.
>
> Some of these RC/M spec project builds may depend on final builds of
> other spec projects. Final build of the spec project cannot be published
> to maven central (or basically anywhere from where it cannot be
> immediately deleted should the request for it come) with out prior
> approvals from EF (release review process) and spec committee (ballot).
> What is the point of pushing knwown-to-be broken for some undefined
> period of time broken RC/M builds to maven central?
>
>
> Should anyone have a need to use artifacts from the staging repo in his
> project, adding the staging repo to his pom is relatively easy to find
> and simple thing to do.
>
> thanks,
> --lukas
>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Emily
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 8:12 AM Mark Thomas <_markt@apache.org_ <mailto:markt@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> <mailto:_markt@apache.org_<mailto:markt@xxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
>>
>> For Servlet, Pages, EL, WebSocket: No.
>>
>> Implementations should use the staging repository if they want
>> access to
>> non-final release artifacts.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>> On 12/01/2022 23:12, Emily Jiang via jakartaee-platform-dev wrote:
>> > At the moment, some specs push RCx or Mx to maven central, which is
>> > great so that implementations can easily pick them up and provide
>> > feedback if anything is not working. However, not all specs
>> follow this
>> > approach. Can we get the following specs to push their latest Mx
>> or RCx
>> > to maven central so that implementations can easily consume them?
>> Open
>> > Liberty would like to consume the artifacts as soon as possible
>> so that
>> > we can provide timely feedback if we find any issues.
>> >
>> > * authentication 3.0
>> > * authorization 2.1
>> > * concurrency 3.0
>> > * connectors 2.1
>> > * _expression_ language 5.0
>> > * faces 4.0
>> > * jsonp 2.1
>> > * jsonb 3.0
>> > * jstl 3.0
>> > * messaging 3.1
>> > * pages 3.1
>> > * persistence 3.1
>> > * restfulWS 3.1
>> > * security 3.0
>> > * servlet 6.0
>> > * websocket 2.1
>> >
>> >
>> > Your help is greatly appreciated!
>> > --
>> > Thanks
>> > Emily
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
>> > _jakartaee-platform-dev@eclipse.org_
> <mailto:jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> <mailto:_jakartaee-platform-dev@eclipse.org_
> <mailto:jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
>> > To unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> _https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev_
> <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev>
>> <_https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev_
> <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev>>
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
>> _jakartaee-platform-dev@eclipse.org_
> <mailto:jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> <mailto:_jakartaee-platform-dev@eclipse.org_
> <mailto:jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> _https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev_
> <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev>
>> <_https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev_
> <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thanks
>> Emily
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
>> _jakartaee-platform-dev@eclipse.org_
> <mailto:jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit _https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev_
> <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list_
> __jakartaee-platform-dev@eclipse.org_
> <mailto:jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> _https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev_
> <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev>_______________________________________________
> jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
> jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev
> <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
> jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev
--
Ivar Grimstad
Jakarta EE Developer Advocate | Eclipse Foundation Eclipse Foundation - Community. Code. Collaboration.
_______________________________________________ jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!ZdzZBFtuhqcWIQSznAifD1oQ26ofZ0tL_VgwPXiIULlRlVt-9r1SK8Q6fPC87tM$