Re: [websocket-dev] Progress towards first release

[Mark Thomas <markt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Grr.

I just realised that the builds created in Jenkins were hard-coded to 
use Java 8 so the JDK setting was ignored.

I removed the hard-coded JDK only to discover that the build fails with 
Java 6 as at least one of the configured plug-ins requires Java 7.

I've switched the jdk-6 build to jdk-7 for now.

I currently working on the release build as there are still a few jsonp 
references we need to fix.

Mark


On 24/10/2018 20:11, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 24/10/2018 17:54, Joakim Erdfelt wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 5:02 AM Mark Thomas <markt@xxxxxxxxxx 
> > <mailto:markt@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> <snip/>
>
> >     My working assumptions are:
> >     - the release will be performed by the Jenkins release job from the
> >     EE4J_8 branch
> >
> >
> > The initial release yes.
> > The branch name is one of the inputs in the release process.
> > Future releases will probably be from other branches.
>
> Ack.
>
> >     - it is very preferable to keep master and EE4J_8 in sync
> >
> >
> > Can you explain why you think this is necessary?
> > After the initial release, I don't envision EE4J_8 having much more 
> > activity.
> > The future after the initial release will be in a new branch, right?
>
> I meant only until we did the first release. My main concern (more for 
> other projects than this) is that any changes in EE4J_8 need to be in 
> master. We don't have that problem.
>
> As soon as this first release is out my expectation is that we'll switch 
> to development on master and tag/branch master for the next release.
>
> >     - CI should test minimum required Java version (6) and latest
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately we don't have much control over the CI environment.
> > There are a number of Java VM's we can use that are considered "pre 
> > installed".
> > These are hinted at by Mikaël Barbero in his email to ee4j-build ...
> > https://www.eclipse.org/lists/ee4j-build/msg00217.html
> >
> > The filesystem locations for them are still a mystery to me (currently).
> > If we have a specific jdk we want to build against, I can track it 
> > down for updating the release scripts.
>
> I put in a bugzilla issue and the Eclipse infrastructure folks have 
> added the latest JDKs for Java 6 up to Jenkins. Our builds should be set 
> up to use them.
>
> >     - changes that alter the API and/or documented behaviour are not
> >        acceptable in this release
> >
> > Yeah, that's unfortunate.
>
> It would have been nice but I understand the reasoning for this limitation.
>
> >     - clean-up is desirable but not essential
> >
> >
> > I see general javadoc syntax cleanup being important (as the newer 
> > javadoc doclint is FAR more strict to the W3C HTML 4.01 HTML standard)
> >
> >     - we need to follow the various Eclipse policies and PMC directives
> >
> >
> > I think we have most of the policies and PMC directives already covered.
> > The only one I haven't verified is the LICENSE and NOTICE file within 
> > the META-INF directory of the archives.
> > Can you think of any others we've missed?
>
> Nope. I think we are good.
>
> >     So, on the progress summary.
> >
> >     Complete for master and EE4J:
> >     - correct min java version
> >     - No automatic module name is defined (NB this requirement might 
> > change)
> >
> >     Complete for master:
> >     - groupId/artifactId
> >     - required legal docs (NOTICE, LICENSE, CONTIBUTING) are present
> >     - copyright notices updated where required
> >     - CI running and passing for min Java version
> >     - CI running and passing for latest Java version
> >     - CI copyright check passes
> >     - .gitignore has been added
> >     - Fixed Javadoc warnings
> >     - Fixed IDE warnings
> >
> >     Things we have to do before we can release:
> >     - version is correct (3.0.2-SNAPSHOT) (PR #276)
> >     - latest parent POM (1.0.2) is being used (PR #276)
> >     - CI release build running and passing (PR #276)
> >
> >     Things that would be nice to have in the release:
> >     - Re-check formatting against provided Eclipse formatter
> >
> >     In short, we need to apply PR #267 (an approval is required) and then
> >     merge all the changes from master to EE4J and we should be ready 
> > for the
> >     release.
> >
> >
> > Did you mean https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/websocket-api/pull/276 ?
> > If so, it's approved.
>
> Thanks. I've applied it.
>
> > (we should either fix or remove the travis build on websocket-api, to 
> > get rid of those PR errors)
>
> I looked into it. It is failing because the EE4J parent POM is not in 
> Maven Central. I assume that will happen at some point. I'm therefore 
> intending to leave Travis as is for now.
>
> I have just created PR #277. That applies every change made on master to 
> EE4J_8. Once that is approved and applied I think we will be ready to 
> release.
>
> Mark
> _______________________________________________
> websocket-dev mailing list
> websocket-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe 
> from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/websocket-dev