Prepare for Maven release #613

Tibor17 · 2013-01-15T17:46:24Z

With Stephen Connolly we prepared a new configuration to release JUnit in Maven.
Discussed in #511.

The secret stuff is in settings.xml -moved away from system properties -not specifying mvn profile in command line explicitly (observed by release-plugin).

new server ids in settings.xml
removed extensions in pom.xmldue to HTTP does not need wagon extension
added release-plugin which does all the stuff while releasing a new release version

marcphilipp · 2013-01-15T20:05:04Z

doc/building-junit.txt

+  - If not done, copy GnuPG keys in to ${gpg.homedir}. See settings.xml.
+  - Perform Maven Release in Jenkins
+    - (to deploy snapshot version) mvn clean deploy
+    - (to deploy specified release version) mvn clean release:prepare release:perform


We should probably document the two parameters mentioned by @stephenc in https://github.com/KentBeck/junit/pull/511#issuecomment-12268366 here:

mvn -DreleaseVersion=4.12 -DdevelopmentVersion=4.13-SNAPSHOT release:prepare release:perform

There's a step missing here: Once you have pushed a release to Sonatype's staging repo, you have to close that repo as described here:
https://docs.sonatype.org/display/Repository/Sonatype+OSS+Maven+Repository+Usage+Guide#SonatypeOSSMavenRepositoryUsageGuide-8a.ReleaseIt

@marcphilipp
ok, but now it's event better than deploying it all manually.

I did not mention these system props because you use to configure the release version in Jenkins.
I understood @stephenc that release:prepare release:perform is simple and enough that you need to type as maven goals.
I think this will be real use. We should check it out. Are you able to delete a deployed artifact from Nexus release repo?

@marcphilipp
Pls see the building-junit.txt if you like it now.
Thx

I think you need to update the pull request ;-)

While we're on the free FOSS plan of ClouBees the set of Jenkins plugins is limited. We cannot use the M2 release Jenkins plugin to set these variables for us because it is not included in the free plan. Thus we have to use regular Jenkins job params and pass those to the Maven call if we want to use Jenkins for releasing.

@marcphilipp
I could not find the option for release version in my DEV@cloud you showed me either.
Then it is uncomfortable use to type these props. Is there any way to persuade the CloudBees without paying.
They are Java based?

I can see about if we can install the plugin for you if you really need it.
Shouldn't be an issue, but not my call

On 16 January 2013 08:32, Tibor Digana [email protected] wrote:

In doc/building-junit.txt:

Not too tedious:

Push to github (dsaff and KentBeck)

Run the mvn clean install

Upload stuff to github (including tag)

Push to maven

mvn -Dgpg.passphrase="" -Psign clean deploy

If not done, update src/main/config/settings.xml in /private/.../settings.xml on CloudBees' webdav share.

If not done, copy GnuPG keys in to ${gpg.homedir}. See settings.xml.

Perform Maven Release in Jenkins

(to deploy snapshot version) mvn clean deploy

(to deploy specified release version) mvn clean release:prepare release:perform

@marcphilipp https://github.com/marcphilipp
I could not find the option for release version in my DEV@cloud you
showed me either.
Then it is uncomfortable use to type these props. Is there any way to
persuade the CloudBees without paying.
They are Java based?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/KentBeck/junit/pull/613/files#r2662293.

@dsaff
See above.

Maybe CloudBees logo in JUnit website would make it :)

stephenc · 2013-01-16T05:45:22Z

src/main/config/settings.xml

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
 <!--
-    The JUnit build system is using this file.
+    The JUnit build system is using this file as a template.


I would rather see this in building-junit.txt.

It is bad practice to give, what is a partial file, as a template. What you actually want to do is add the entries and the but only if you are a release manager. Nobody else needs this content, and I fear we will just confuse Maven nubies including this entire file.

ok, we can move it to the bottom of building-junit.txt.

This change is still coming, right?

@dsaff
done

Tibor17 · 2013-01-16T08:46:33Z

@marcphilipp
@stephenc
Did you email the security on the webdav share?
More convinced to store settings.xml there?
Is there other way than the webdav share ?

Tibor17 · 2013-01-16T08:48:07Z

I will push the changes in eight hours.

dsaff · 2013-01-16T18:27:30Z

doc/building-junit.txt

@@ -2,14 +2,17 @@ Steps to build junit:

 - Must be manual
  - Write release notes
-  - Update version in pom.xml
+  - Update SNAPSHOT version in pom.xml


Well, sometimes it will be a SNAPSHOT version, and sometimes, it will be a final release, right?

@dsaff
Proposing always snapshot in GitHub.
Release should be created by release-plugin and deployed from ClouBees as a copy of latest snapshot commit in GitHub.

@stephenc
@marcphilipp
Do you agree?

@dsaff
@marcphilipp
@stephenc
Is it really worth to upgrade snapshot version in GitHub?
Easier to keep something like 4.0-SNAPSHOT.
Less manual work.

I think the maven release plugin will upgrade both versions at the same time and snapshot committed in to GitHub.

I don't have a reason to need the snapshot version upgraded on every release. Do we need it further on in the build chain?

AFAIK the maven-release-plugin takes care of updating the snapshot version in the repo as well. Thus, I don't see any benefit of having 4.0-SNAPSHOT in the repo.

@marcphilipp
I see only benefit from M2 release plugin in Jenkins.
@dsaff I hope you have the rights to login to our CloudBees account.

@marcphilipp
yes, using maven-release-plugin was the cool idea and standard way to make a release.
still i think the simplest and more safe solution for you @marcphilipp and @dsaff will be to use M2 release plugin in Jenkins instead of typing Maven goals with properties and tag name in Maven command.

Tibor17 · 2013-01-16T19:03:44Z

Let's discuss our findings and proposals.

Tibor17 · 2013-01-16T20:12:57Z

@dsaff
@marcphilipp

you did not tell me the real key name, so I set GnuPG key name to junit in pom.xml.
Pls tell me if should be changed.

The gpg key you use is needed to sign maven artifacts (*.asc) in maven central.

dsaff · 2013-01-16T20:16:47Z

This looks fine to me, but I'm probably the least knowledgeable person in the room on the finer points here.

Tibor17 · 2013-01-16T20:22:52Z

@dsaff
see the asc files
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/junit/junit/4.11/

If you compiled project for e.g 4.8 on your system, the keys had to be already installed in $HOME/.gnupg
Just type command to see your installed keys
gpg --list-keys

Tibor17 · 2013-01-16T21:22:48Z

@dsaff
ok, I found two public keys registered in junit (gpg --search-keys junit)
and only one of them is registered to Marc Philipp (JUnit Maven Deployment) 67893CC4.

It looks this should be correct.

…(including tag)"

Tibor17 · 2013-01-17T09:39:44Z

@dsaff
@marcphilipp
@stephenc
It seems there are no new requests for a change.
Can we now make a dummy release in to Maven Central and delete the artifacts immediately?

stephenc · 2013-01-17T09:53:55Z

I was at a conferece all day yesterday. There are some tweaks I would like to apply and I am waiting for @marcphilipp or @dsaff to respond re: me going in and setting up a release job on jenkins.

No big issue from my PoV in making a dummy release, esp if we tell jenkins not to push tags and @dsaff/@marcphilipp agree to drop the staging repo so that nobody else gets the dummy artifact

stephenc · 2013-01-17T10:39:14Z

Some tweaks at https://github.com/KentBeck/junit/pull/614

marcphilipp · 2013-01-17T20:31:13Z

@Tibor17 Can we close this pull request in favor of #614?

Tibor17 · 2013-01-19T13:04:41Z

merged to #614

Prepare for Maven release

0fdec44

Tibor17 mentioned this pull request Jan 15, 2013

Maven project junit:junit:jar #511

Merged

marcphilipp reviewed Jan 15, 2013
View reviewed changes

promoting released artifacts and closed staging

57801df

stephenc reviewed Jan 16, 2013
View reviewed changes

dsaff reviewed Jan 16, 2013
View reviewed changes

removed settings.xml, updated building-junit.txt and pom.xml

59f3fa6

public GnuPG key 67893CC4

a83de0f

Tibor Digana added 2 commits January 17, 2013 02:13

-Dtag=4.12

4908f0a

removed "Update SNAPSHOT version in pom.xml" "Upload stuff to github …

aa70747

…(including tag)"

stephenc mentioned this pull request Jan 17, 2013

Tweaks on pull request https://github.com/KentBeck/junit/pull/613 #614

Merged

Tibor17 closed this Jan 19, 2013

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Prepare for Maven release #613

Prepare for Maven release #613

Tibor17 commented Jan 15, 2013

marcphilipp Jan 15, 2013

marcphilipp Jan 15, 2013

Tibor17 Jan 15, 2013

Tibor17 Jan 15, 2013

stephenc Jan 16, 2013

marcphilipp Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 Jan 16, 2013

stephenc Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 Jan 16, 2013

stephenc Jan 16, 2013

marcphilipp Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 Jan 16, 2013

dsaff Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

dsaff Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 Jan 16, 2013

dsaff Jan 16, 2013

marcphilipp Jan 17, 2013

Tibor17 Jan 17, 2013

Tibor17 Jan 17, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

dsaff commented Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 17, 2013

stephenc commented Jan 17, 2013

stephenc commented Jan 17, 2013

marcphilipp commented Jan 17, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 19, 2013

Prepare for Maven release #613

Prepare for Maven release #613

Conversation

Tibor17 commented Jan 15, 2013

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

dsaff commented Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 16, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 17, 2013

stephenc commented Jan 17, 2013

stephenc commented Jan 17, 2013

marcphilipp commented Jan 17, 2013

Tibor17 commented Jan 19, 2013