commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Luc Maisonobe <>
Subject Re: Site Builds and Release Votes
Date Sun, 13 Oct 2013 18:03:17 GMT
Le 13/10/2013 17:35, Stefan Bodewig a écrit :
> Hi all
> in the recent release vote for Compress Gary and I had very different
> opinions on the importance of the site build for release candidates.
> On 2013-10-13, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Stefan Bodewig <> wrote:
>>> I have not created a RC website as the only difference to the current
>>> website would be the download page and the version number - and I'd
>>> immediately change the site after the release to include the release
>>> date anyway.
>> - Using the live site for the RC is a bad idea IMO because the source
>> will have to be changed to update the version, for example "The
>> current release is 1.5." and "Commons Compress 1.5 requires Java 5"
>> and who knows what else will have to be changed. This means that what
>> is in the RC is NOT building the 1.6 site, it is building a SNAPSHOT
>> site.
> To me creating the site is one of the completely unnecessary steps to
> perform when cutting a release candidate.  Building and uploading the
> site takes something > 15 minutes to me.  So far I have never published
> the RC site when the RC was accepted but rather created a new site build
> that contained the release date, updated the changes report with a
> placeholder for the next release and so on.
> We can - and should - update the site outside of any release anyway, so
> to me the site content is completely irrelevant when I evaluate
> releases.
> I'll admit that this mirrors my suspicion that nobody looks at the site
> build contained in the binary release anyway.  People use their
> dependency manager of choice and the online docs in my experience.
> How do others think about the release candidate site build?

I agree the site build is orthogonal to release.
The main thing we release is source code. Then on top of that we add
some binaries, but it is already a by-product. The site itself is not
something we should consider to be in the scope of the release.


> Stefan
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message