Re: [ALL] Proposed tarball staging process

On 20 June 2013 22:22, Gary Gregory wrote: > Looks good. I would say use the plural for both: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/commons-net-3.3-RC1[/binaries|/sources] That is not the ASF con

Re: [ALL] Proposed tarball staging process

Looks good. I would say use the plural for both: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/commons-net-3.3-RC1[/binaries|/sources] Gary On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:53 PM, sebb wrote: > The current tarb

Re: [ALL] Proposed tarball staging process

+1 http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://twitter.com/simonetripodi On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 8:53 PM, sebb wrote: > The current tarball (*) staging process uses Nexus, which works well > for Maven jars and is OK as a means of staging tarballs for voting. > > However: once the vote succe

[ALL] Proposed tarball staging process

The current tarball (*) staging process uses Nexus, which works well for Maven jars and is OK as a means of staging tarballs for voting. However: once the vote succeeds, the tarballs need to be extracted and pushed to the dist/release repo. This is tricky and error-prone; it's possible to delete a