release jclouds 1.6.0-rc.3

[codefromthecrypt]

release jclouds 1.6.0-rc.3

Work to do:

• jclouds
  • [x] staging repo closed
  • [x] staging repo verified
  • [x] staging repo released
  • [x] tags pushed
  • [x] in maven central
• jclouds-chef
  • [x] staging repo closed
  • [x] staging repo verified
  • [x] staging repo released
  • [x] tags pushed
  • [x] in maven central
• jclouds-karaf
  • [ ] staging repo closed
  • [ ] staging repo verified
  • [ ] staging repo released
  • [ ] tags pushed
  • [ ] in maven central
• jclouds-cli
  • [ ] staging repo closed
  • [ ] staging repo verified
  • [ ] staging repo released
  • [ ] tags pushed
  • [ ] in maven central
• communication
  • [ ] await maven central sync
  • [ ] email jclouds-dev google group

Here are the release commands for jclouds:

mvn release:clean release:prepare -DreleaseVersion=1.6.0-rc.3 -Dtag=jclouds-1.6.0-rc.3 -DdevelopmentVersion=1.6.0-SNAPSHOT -DpushChanges=false

mvn clean release:perform -DconnectionUrl=scm:git:file://`pwd`/.git -Dtag=jclouds-1.6.0-rc.3 -Dgoals="deploy -DskipTests"

<close oss sonatype staging repository and test it, then release it> https://oss.sonatype.org/index.html#stagingRepositories

git push
git push --tags

[codefromthecrypt]

Repo ready for testing https://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/orgjclouds-223

[demobox]

If this goes through, time to close out https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/issues/1456 and https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/issues/1399 (rc.1 and rc.2 release issues)?

[codefromthecrypt]

sure.

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Phillips notifications@github.comwrote:

If this goes through, time to close out #1456https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/issues/1456and

1399 https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/issues/1399 (rc.1 and rc.2

release issues)?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/issues/1494#issuecomment-15909147 .

[codefromthecrypt]

validated repo by testing compute-basics with aws-ec2 and blobstore-basics with cloudfiles-us

[codefromthecrypt]

per @andrewgaul good to go

[gaul]

Ran Maginatics smoke tests against against these blobstores: aws-s3, azureblob, cloudfiles-uk, cloudfiles-us, filesystem, hpcloud-objectstorage, synaptic-atmos, and transient.

[demobox]

In Maven Central. Thanks, @adriancole !

[codefromthecrypt]

planning to cut jclouds-labs in 1hr. speak up now, if there are any missing commits. Note we will certainly have an rc.4 so no big deal.

[demobox]

planning to cut jclouds-labs in 1hr

Coolio. Note you'll have to have a pre-commit to first set the jclouds.version to 1.6.0-rc.3 and then another one afterwards to set it back to snapshot. See https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/commit/a7b6a2c3405a7478e726fbc0c81d8a6a5e2bc619 and https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/commit/2aacf31bca996a3fe0c302a1422581eb671e8207.

Also, want to cherry-pick Matt's POM-simplification commit to 1.6.x or leave that on master?

[codefromthecrypt]

I started uploading already, but this is a better idea. going to cherry-pick and start again.

[demobox]

I started uploading already

Note to self: that's what happens when you don't keep up with GitHub messages ;-)

[codefromthecrypt]

there were a series of problems in the labs poms relating to osgi imports being accidentally named based on maven artifacts instead of packages. I'll issue a PR against 1.6.x in a minute.

[codefromthecrypt]

ok pull request for labs to fix the poms. when this gets +1'd I can start the release https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/27

[codefromthecrypt]

somebody else needs to do labs, I've starved all day on osgi, pom crap and out of time. sorry guys.

[demobox]

I've starved all day on osgi, pom crap and out of time.

What a diet! ;-) Will try to help later if I can. Will check the PRs first...

[demobox]

Will try to help later if I can. Will check the PRs first...

Sorry, got stuck in a late-night refactoring session :-( And given Ioannis comment on https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/27, still wondering whether that part of the PR should be included or ignored for now.

[codefromthecrypt]

I can revert all osgi fixes if we want. We no longer use class.forName since v1.4 so I think we would make identical changes later.

On Saturday, April 6, 2013, Andrew Phillips wrote:

Will try to help later if I can. Will check the PRs first...

Sorry, got stuck in a late-night refactoring session :-( And given Ioannis comment on jclouds/jclouds-labs#27https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/issues/27, still wondering whether that part of the PR should be included or ignored for now.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/issues/1494#issuecomment-15996562 .

[codefromthecrypt]

p.s. we should not block chef, karaf, and cli on labs. Let's get this release out and skip labs if need be. I'd really hate to have yet another incomplete rc on account of labs.

[codefromthecrypt]

in fact, I'm taking labs out of the todo list, as fundamentally our release should never be blocked on labs as that can always go out later.

[nacx]

jclouds-chef repo ready for testing: https://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/orgjclouds-598/

[nacx]

(closed accidentally, the buttons are too close! :)) jclouds-chef repo ready for testing: https://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/orgjclouds-598/

[nacx]

jclouds-chef repo verified and tested with Abiquo and Hosted chef. Awaiting Maven Central sync.

[codefromthecrypt]

p.s. I'd recommend releasing the current state of jclouds-labs else pretty soon it will be impossible to release 1.6.0-rc.3 there anymore due to in-flight changes on jclouds/jclouds 1.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[codefromthecrypt]

otherwise, completely skip labs rc.3; either way is fine with me

[nacx]

jclouds-chef in Maven Central.

[nacx]

When releasing labs, we should tag this commit. The next one is after 1.6.0-rc.3 and is not part of the release; the build will fail if releasing a later version. If I have time I'll try to release labs today.

[nacx]

As mentioned here there are poms in branch 1.6.x of labs that have 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT versions:

~/src/jclouds-labs ((2aacf31...)) $ find . -name pom.xml -exec grep -nH '1.7.0' {} \;
./opsource-servers/pom.xml:27:    <version>1.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
./greenqloud-compute/pom.xml:27:        <version>1.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
./nodepool/pom.xml:27:    <version>1.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
./savvis-symphonyvpdc/pom.xml:27:        <version>1.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
./smartos-ssh/pom.xml:27:        <version>1.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
./rackspace-clouddns/pom.xml:27:    <version>1.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
./carrenza-vcloud-director/pom.xml:27:        <version>1.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
./azure-management/pom.xml:27:    <version>1.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
./cloudstack-ec2/pom.xml:27:    <version>1.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
./jenkins/pom.xml:27:    <version>1.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
./greenqloud-storage/pom.xml:27:        <version>1.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>

Should we:

• Skip labs 1.6.0-rc.3 release until this is fixed?
• Release labs leaving this incorrect poms?
• Fix them, and release with the fix? (Take into account that the fix needs to be applied to the commit mentioned in the commit above).

[codefromthecrypt]

Doesn't the release plugin ask to resolve snapshot versions? If so, we could fix the 1.7 versions to 1.6.0-RC.3 that way, right?

On Tuesday, April 9, 2013, Ignasi Barrera wrote:

As mentioned herehttps://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/15#issuecomment-15998241there are poms in branch 1.6.x of labs that have 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT versions:

~/src/jclouds-labs ((2aacf31...)) $ find . -name pom.xml -exec grep -nH '1.7.0' {} \; ./opsource-servers/pom.xml:27: 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT ./greenqloud-compute/pom.xml:27: 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT ./nodepool/pom.xml:27: 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT ./savvis-symphonyvpdc/pom.xml:27: 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT ./smartos-ssh/pom.xml:27: 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT ./rackspace-clouddns/pom.xml:27: 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT ./carrenza-vcloud-director/pom.xml:27: 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT ./azure-management/pom.xml:27: 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT ./cloudstack-ec2/pom.xml:27: 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT ./jenkins/pom.xml:27: 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT ./greenqloud-storage/pom.xml:27: 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT

Should we:

• Skip labs 1.6.0-rc.3 release until this is fixed?
• Release labs leaving this incorrect poms?
• Fix them, and release with the fix? (Take into account that the fix needs to be applied to the commit mentioned in the commit above).

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/issues/1494#issuecomment-16099119 .

[nacx]

Right, we can then release as you said, and fix the poms in HEAD.

[mattstep]

@nacx this is fixed in labs HEAD, and shouldn't arise again. I would suggest refactoring labs 1.6.x branch to the parenting model in HEAD.

[demobox]

When releasing labs, we should tag this commit

@nacx Shouldn't we tag the commit where both jclouds.version and project.version are set to the "release" version, i.e. 1.6.0-rc.3? That would be the "regular" Maven release commit, no?

[nacx]

@demobox sure, what I meant is that we should start the release process in that commit, instead of the 1.6.x HEAD. I didn't express it properly :)

Next thing is that even if the maven-release-plugin fixes the 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT versions to the right 1.6.0-rc.3, those projects also have an incorrect parent. They are pointing to the jclouds-project pom (which is also outside the labs git repository).

This is already fixed in #44, but for this release I think we should change the parent configuration to point to the jclouds-labs-project pom, like in the rest of labs projects.

I've already made the changes, but I'll wait for some opinions +1's before releasing and tagging with these changes.

[demobox]

@nacx I think the problem for most of these is that they are simply not part of the current jclouds-labs module set:

<modules>
   <module>virtualbox</module>
   <module>vcloud-director</module>
   <module>elb</module>
   <module>aws-elb</module>
   <module>dmtf</module>
   <module>cdmi</module>
   <module>joyent-cloudapi</module>
   <module>joyentcloud</module>
   <module>google-compute-engine</module>
   <module>iam</module>
   <module>aws-iam</module>
   <module>rds</module>
   <module>aws-rds</module>
   <module>fgcp</module>
   <module>fgcp-au</module>
   <module>fgcp-de</module>
   <module>abiquo</module>
   <module>oauth</module>
   <module>openstack</module>
   <module>rackspace-clouddns</module>
</modules>

In that case, they should be ignored by the release plugin anyway. I'm assuming the omissions are deliberate, by the way, but @adriancole probably has more info on that.

[nacx]

The two buttons being so close is killing me :)

The maven-release-plugin ignores them, so the version will remain unchanged and the artifacts are not going to be uploaded to the Maven Central, so we could leave them unchanged If we wanted.

The only thing to take into account is that the tag will be created with the released projects in 1.6.0-rc.3 and the other ones in 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT.

[demobox]

The only thing to take into account is that the tag will be created with the released projects in 1.6.0-rc.3 and the other ones in 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT.

I can live with that. The tag should allow you to recreate the artifacts that were released for that version. That there may be other code in that tag unrelated to the released artifacts seems OK to me.

[codefromthecrypt]

I can live with that, too. I hope some projects migrate to their own repos for RC.4 as well :)

On Tuesday, April 9, 2013, Andrew Phillips wrote:

The only thing to take into account is that the tag will be created with the released projects in 1.6.0-rc.3 and the other ones in 1.7.0-SNAPSHOT.

I can live with that. The tag should allow you to recreate the artifacts that were released for that version. That there may be other code in that tag unrelated to the released artifacts seems OK to me.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/issues/1494#issuecomment-16116924 .

[demobox]

Javadocs available

[demobox]

@adriancole @nacx Are we planning to do any more work on this?

[codefromthecrypt]

No

On Tuesday, May 7, 2013, Andrew Phillips wrote:

@adriancole https://github.com/adriancole @nacxhttps://github.com/nacxAre we planning to do any more work on this?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/issues/1494#issuecomment-17543560 .

[demobox]

No

Will close. Please reopen if more work does happen to come along.