On 22/05/2009, Selvaratnam Uthaiyashankar <uthaiyashan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Sebb,
>
>
>
>  >>
>  >>  I have uploaded the Apache Stonehenge M1 release artifacts here:
>  >>  http://people.apache.org/~shankar/stonehenge/m1/take3/
>  >
>  > Sigs and hashes OK.
>  > Binary tgz and zip archives agree with each other.
>  > Source tgz and zip archives agree with each other.
>  >
>  > N&L files appear to be in place.
>  >
>  > However, the source archives don't agree with SVN.
>  >
>  > Apart from the missing Ruby files (I think this is because they are
>  > not ready for release?),
>
>
>
> Yes, you are correct.
>
>
>
>  the source archive does not have the
>  > documentation source files. The generated site files are included
>  > instead. [The binary archive correctly contains the generate site
>  > files.]
>
>
> I fixed it and uploaded to
>  http://people.apache.org/~shankar/stonehenge/m1/take4/
>
>  (Only modification is in the src packs, including documentation source
>  files and removing generated site files).
>
>  Is it ok, or do we have to go for a re-vote?

The source archive does not seem to contain the .css files - how do
these end up in the generated site?

It looks like the xdocs/resources directory is missing from SVN and
the source archive.

Also, how are the source and binary archives built?
There are normally build scripts (Ant or Maven) in SVN for this, and
these need to go into the source archives.

It must be possible to build the binary archive from the source
archive + any 3rd party dependencies.

>
>  >
>  > There does not appear to be any documentation on how to build the
>  > binary release from the source.
>
>
> This information is given in the installation instructions on the Wiki.
>

Where?

There are instructions as to how to build the individual components,
but how does one create stonehenge-stocktrader-m1-incubating.zip from
stonehenge-stocktrader-m1-incubating-src.zip - for example?

Besides, I think the instructions need to be in the source archive -
or at least it needs to point to the exact web-page that has the
instructions.

>  >
>  > The README refers to installation instructions on the Wiki, which is fine.
>  > However it should mention that the archives contain PDFs of the Wiki pages.
>
>
>
> README file mentions "Copy of above wiki pages are included in docs/".

I overlooked that. Might be better to start by saying that the
documents are included, and then mention that the uptodate versions
are on the web.

>
>  >
>  > The build file for the .NET code assumes that the code is being built
>  > from SVN, and tries to update the current directory. This is not
>  > appropriate for a source code archive,
>
>
>
> Current build file will check for svn working copy and if it is not an
>  svn working copy, it will omit it and continue to build. So, it will
>  work in the source release as well. But, you are correct, we have to
>  remove it. Do we have to remove it for this release or can we do it
>  for next release (since it works)?
>
>
>
>   which should be self-contained
>  > (apart from any 3rd party dependencies, which should be documented.).
>  > The build file should check that any required environment variables
>  > are set up and exit with an error if not. Also any required settings
>  > should be documented somewhere, preferably in the script as well as in
>  > the top-level README or BUILDING file.
>  >
>
>
> Installation guide WIKI shows all the dependencies and the settings needed.

As mentioned above, this information needs to be included in the source archive.

>
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>  For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Reply via email to