Camel-Extra 2.10 release

[hekonsek]

Hi,

When do you plan to release camel-extra 2.10? I want to contribute new
component to it (JGroups, which is LGPL) so I've just seen that
current version is still 2.10-SNAPSHOT.

I can make a release if you want me to (I got commiter rights to
camel-extra) but I won't be able to deploy artifacts to
people.apache.org. Some time age I deployed artifacts to Google
Project SVN-based repo, but now camel-extra is deployed elsewhere
(apache.org) so I don't got required permissions.

Laters.

--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

[Christian Mueller]

I'm already delayed with camel-extra 2.9.0 :-( See [1]
I already tagged a release but didn't uploaded the artifacts and signatures
until now. I plan to upload it to [2] where the 2.8.0 artifacts already are.

We should release camel-extra right after camel 2.10.0 but after
camel-extra 2.9.0 (or together).

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-4927
[2]
http://svn.codespot.com/a/apache-extras.org/camel-extra/maven2/releases/org/apache-extras/camel-extra/

Best,
Christian

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Henryk Konsek <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> When do you plan to release camel-extra 2.10? I want to contribute new
> component to it (JGroups, which is LGPL) so I've just seen that
> current version is still 2.10-SNAPSHOT.
>
> I can make a release if you want me to (I got commiter rights to
> camel-extra) but I won't be able to deploy artifacts to
> people.apache.org. Some time age I deployed artifacts to Google
> Project SVN-based repo, but now camel-extra is deployed elsewhere
> (apache.org) so I don't got required permissions.
>
> Laters.
>
> --
> Henryk Konsek
> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
>

[hekonsek]

> I'm already delayed with camel-extra 2.9.0 :-( See [1]
> I already tagged a release but didn't uploaded the artifacts and signatures
> until now. I plan to upload it to [2] where the 2.8.0 artifacts already are.

I want to contribute new component to Camel Extra (JGroups [1], which is LGPL).

If we are already delayed with Camel Extra 2.9, then maybe we could
also tag a 2.10 release? In such case Camel Extra trunk's snapshot
version will be in order with a "mainstream Camel".

BTW I can help you with releasing Camel Extra artifacts. With my new
JGroups and existing DB4O component I'll be author of 20% of Camel
extra components, so I feel emotionally connected to it :) . In the
future there will be probably more stuff in Camel Extra, so it will be
good to have the issue of Camel Extra releases organized.

After releasing the artifacts of 2.9 and 2.10 we could also push
forward a topic of synchronizing Camel Extra with Maven Central.

I propose to start with tagging 2.10 release (to be in sync with main
Camel). Can we tag the 2.10 release? Should you start a vote for it or
something?

Laters.

[1] http://www.jgroups.org/license.html

--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

[Claus Ibsen-2]

Hi

Yeah it would be nice to get camel-extra released as a follow up to
any of the Camel minor releases, eg 2.9.0 2.10.0, 2.11.0.
I am not sure if we can keep up with all the patch releases, as
camel-extra ought to be compatible.



On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Henryk Konsek <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> I'm already delayed with camel-extra 2.9.0 :-( See [1]
>> I already tagged a release but didn't uploaded the artifacts and signatures
>> until now. I plan to upload it to [2] where the 2.8.0 artifacts already are.
>
> I want to contribute new component to Camel Extra (JGroups [1], which is LGPL).
>
> If we are already delayed with Camel Extra 2.9, then maybe we could
> also tag a 2.10 release? In such case Camel Extra trunk's snapshot
> version will be in order with a "mainstream Camel".
>
> BTW I can help you with releasing Camel Extra artifacts. With my new
> JGroups and existing DB4O component I'll be author of 20% of Camel
> extra components, so I feel emotionally connected to it :) . In the
> future there will be probably more stuff in Camel Extra, so it will be
> good to have the issue of Camel Extra releases organized.
>
> After releasing the artifacts of 2.9 and 2.10 we could also push
> forward a topic of synchronizing Camel Extra with Maven Central.
>
> I propose to start with tagging 2.10 release (to be in sync with main
> Camel). Can we tag the 2.10 release? Should you start a vote for it or
> something?
>
> Laters.
>
> [1] http://www.jgroups.org/license.html
>
> --
> Henryk Konsek
> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

--
Claus Ibsen
-----------------
FuseSource
Email: [hidden email]
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
Blog: http://davsclaus.com
Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen

[hekonsek]

> I am not sure if we can keep up with all the patch releases, as
> camel-extra ought to be compatible.

I think we should. It should be transparent for user (as transparent
as possible at least) whether she's using camel or camel-extra. This
is licensing stuff, users usually do not care if they include LGPL- or
Apache- licensed library in their POM file. There should be always
camel-extra artifacts available in the same versions as Camel Core.

I think that we need to perform the following steps:
* tag 2.10 release (so Camel Extra can be in sync mainstream Camel)
* release 2.9 and 2.10 artifacts
* start syncing artifacts from apache-extra with Maven Central (via
Sonatype I guess)
* make sure that whenever new version of Camel (major and minor) is
released, we release Camel-Extra as well

Let's start fixing Camel-Extra state with tagging the releases so they
can be in sync mainstream Camel. So... can I tag 2.10 release? (I got
appropriate permissions)

--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

[hekonsek]

> Let's start fixing Camel-Extra state with tagging the releases so they
> can be in sync mainstream Camel. So... can I tag 2.10 release? (I got
> appropriate permissions)

Can I? :)

BTW Just to put some pressure on us - CAMEL-5397 [1].

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-5397

--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

[Christian Mueller]

Hold on a while!
We should tag camel-extra AFTER we released camel 2.10.0. This is not done
yet.
And we didn't vote for the camel-extra releases in the past. This means the
release procedure for camel-extra releases are much more simpler and faster.
Afterwards we should working on uploading the camel-extra artifacts and
signatures for 2.9.0 and 2.10.0 to Maven Central or so.

Best,
Christian

On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Henryk Konsek <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > I am not sure if we can keep up with all the patch releases, as
> > camel-extra ought to be compatible.
>
> I think we should. It should be transparent for user (as transparent
> as possible at least) whether she's using camel or camel-extra. This
> is licensing stuff, users usually do not care if they include LGPL- or
> Apache- licensed library in their POM file. There should be always
> camel-extra artifacts available in the same versions as Camel Core.
>
> I think that we need to perform the following steps:
> * tag 2.10 release (so Camel Extra can be in sync mainstream Camel)
> * release 2.9 and 2.10 artifacts
> * start syncing artifacts from apache-extra with Maven Central (via
> Sonatype I guess)
> * make sure that whenever new version of Camel (major and minor) is
> released, we release Camel-Extra as well
>
> Let's start fixing Camel-Extra state with tagging the releases so they
> can be in sync mainstream Camel. So... can I tag 2.10 release? (I got
> appropriate permissions)
>
> --
> Henryk Konsek
> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
>

[hekonsek]

> Hold on a while!

Fear not - I won't do anything without the green light from you :) .

> We should tag camel-extra AFTER we released camel 2.10.0. This is not done
> yet.

Should we? Why can't we perform tagging simultaneously? We need to
release regular Camel before Extras (since the latter depends on the
former) but tagging can be done concurrently  - correct me if I'm
wrong :) .

--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

[hekonsek]

> Should we? Why can't we perform tagging simultaneously? We need to
> release regular Camel before Extras (since the latter depends on the
> former) but tagging can be done concurrently  - correct me if I'm
> wrong :) .

So what about tagging Camel Extra simultaneously to regular Camel? :)

Sorry for being so pushy, but I'll be able to manage some time I could
dedicate to this issue within the next two weeks. :) After then my
vacation starts so I won't help you with that.

--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

[Christian Mueller]

Nothing to apologize to be pushy - as long you can live with a slightly
delayed answer... ;-)
I have to reach a deadline for an article for a German Java magazine which
took more time as expected...

When we tag camel-extra 2.10.0, we have to update the version to 2.10.0 in
camel-extra too. For this, we need the Camel 2.10.0 artifacts (not only in
a staging repo). This is the dependency I have in mind. Claus sent a
message to Hadrian to build a new Camel 2.10.0 RC. May be we will see it
end of this week or beginning of next week...
About uploading the artifacts (including the signatures), I don't know
whether this works already out of the box. I doubt, but will check it next
week...

Best,
Christian

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Henryk Konsek <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > Should we? Why can't we perform tagging simultaneously? We need to
> > release regular Camel before Extras (since the latter depends on the
> > former) but tagging can be done concurrently  - correct me if I'm
> > wrong :) .
>
> So what about tagging Camel Extra simultaneously to regular Camel? :)
>
> Sorry for being so pushy, but I'll be able to manage some time I could
> dedicate to this issue within the next two weeks. :) After then my
> vacation starts so I won't help you with that.
>
> --
> Henryk Konsek
> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
>

[hekonsek]

> When we tag camel-extra 2.10.0, we have to update the version to 2.10.0 in
> camel-extra too. For this, we need the Camel 2.10.0 artifacts (not only in
> a staging repo). This is the dependency I have in mind.

Actually I thought that we could just build+install the Camel 2.10
locally (from 2.10 tag) and work against artifact from our local
repository. Then, after the Camel 2.10 is in central, we could remove
our local 2.10 artifacts and verify that our Camel-Extra tag can be
built against Camel artifacts from central.

I aware that in pessimistic case this approach will require us to
update SVN tag, what is technically possible but not respects the
immutability of the tag. But it speeds things up :) .

> About uploading the artifacts (including the signatures), I don't know
> whether this works already out of the box. I doubt, but will check it next
> week...

Yeah, we could investigate (and probably fix it) later.

--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

[Christian Mueller]

Hadrian canceled the release [1].
This means the existing tag will be replaced by a new one. So we have to
wait for this one...

Running camel-extra against Camel 2.10.0 is done in a few seconds. Tagging
it also. I don't see the advantage not to wait until Camel 2.10.0 is
released.
The only thing I (or someone else) has to figure out is how we signe our
artifacts and to which repo we want to upload it.

[1]
http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Apache-Camel-2-10-0-td5714768.html

Best,
Christian

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Henryk Konsek <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > When we tag camel-extra 2.10.0, we have to update the version to 2.10.0
> in
> > camel-extra too. For this, we need the Camel 2.10.0 artifacts (not only
> in
> > a staging repo). This is the dependency I have in mind.
>
> Actually I thought that we could just build+install the Camel 2.10
> locally (from 2.10 tag) and work against artifact from our local
> repository. Then, after the Camel 2.10 is in central, we could remove
> our local 2.10 artifacts and verify that our Camel-Extra tag can be
> built against Camel artifacts from central.
>
> I aware that in pessimistic case this approach will require us to
> update SVN tag, what is technically possible but not respects the
> immutability of the tag. But it speeds things up :) .
>
> > About uploading the artifacts (including the signatures), I don't know
> > whether this works already out of the box. I doubt, but will check it
> next
> > week...
>
> Yeah, we could investigate (and probably fix it) later.
>
> --
> Henryk Konsek
> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
>

[hekonsek]

> The only thing I (or someone else) has to figure out is how we signe our
> artifacts and to which repo we want to upload it.

I'll take a look at this but before that I need to deal with broken
camel-hibernate build.

--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

[hekonsek]

> When we tag camel-extra 2.10.0, we have to update the version to 2.10.0 in
> camel-extra too. For this, we need the Camel 2.10.0 artifacts (not only in
> a staging repo).

So Camel 2.10.0 arrived to Central [1]. Can I tag 2.10.0 version of
Camel-Extra then? I can almost hear Maven release:prepare goal begging
me to execute it :) .

[1] http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/camel/camel-core/2.10.0

--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

[Christian Mueller]

Before we do a camel-extra 2.10.0 release, I would like to discuss to
change the license header in camel-extra to the following one. It's the GNU
v2 license header template:

/**************************************************************************************
  Copyright (C) 2008 - 2012 Camel Extra Team.
  http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/camel-extra/

  This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
  modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
  as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
  of the License, or (at your option) any later version.

  This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
  but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
  MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
  GNU General Public License for more details.

  You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
  along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
  Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
02110-1301, USA.

  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0-standalone.html
***************************************************************************************/

And if you have some minutes/hours free, could you try to get the
maven-rat-plugin (version 0.8) working with the new license headers? It
should be possible to refer to a custom license header but I didn't got it
working until now:
http://ci.apache.org/projects/rat/apache-rat-plugin/examples/custom-license.html

Best,
Christian

On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Henryk Konsek <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > When we tag camel-extra 2.10.0, we have to update the version to 2.10.0
> in
> > camel-extra too. For this, we need the Camel 2.10.0 artifacts (not only
> in
> > a staging repo).
>
> So Camel 2.10.0 arrived to Central [1]. Can I tag 2.10.0 version of
> Camel-Extra then? I can almost hear Maven release:prepare goal begging
> me to execute it :) .
>
> [1] http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/camel/camel-core/2.10.0
>
> --
> Henryk Konsek
> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
>

[hekonsek]

> And if you have some minutes/hours free, could you try to get the
> maven-rat-plugin (version 0.8) working with the new license headers?

Sure, I'll handle this.

--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

[Christian Mueller]

Thanks in advance...

Christian

Sent from a mobile device
Am 06.07.2012 08:36 schrieb "Henryk Konsek" <[hidden email]>:

> > And if you have some minutes/hours free, could you try to get the
> > maven-rat-plugin (version 0.8) working with the new license headers?
>
> Sure, I'll handle this.
>
> --
> Henryk Konsek
> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
>

[hekonsek]

> Thanks in advance...

Ok done. I only need to reformat the POM XML to look nicer and then can commit.

Just tell me one thing - is the header below official? Should I start
to apply it to all files in Camel Extra?

/**************************************************************************************
  Copyright (C) 2008 - 2012 Camel Extra Team.
  http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/camel-extra/

  This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
  modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
  as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
  of the License, or (at your option) any later version.

  This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
  but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
  MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
  GNU General Public License for more details.

  You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
  along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
  Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
02110-1301, USA.

  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0-standalone.html
***************************************************************************************/

--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com

[Christian Mueller]

I would like to change the license headers for camel-extra and started a
discussion [1]. Feel free to add your opinion. If nobody complains about
this until Wednesday, I assume we reached lazy consensus and we can do the
change.

The last thing I want to check before we release camel-extra 2.10.0 is
generating the asc files as we do it for our regular Apache Camel releases.
Than the user can check whether the signature comes from somebody who is a
known Camel(-extra) committer. For this, we have a 'KEYS' file in our Camel
root directory with our PGP keys. Why not doing the same here...

[1]
http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-change-the-license-headers-in-camel-extra-td5715583.html

Best,
Christian

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Henryk Konsek <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > Thanks in advance...
>
> Ok done. I only need to reformat the POM XML to look nicer and then can
> commit.
>
> Just tell me one thing - is the header below official? Should I start
> to apply it to all files in Camel Extra?
>
>
> /**************************************************************************************
>   Copyright (C) 2008 - 2012 Camel Extra Team.
>   http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/camel-extra/
>
>   This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
>   modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
>   as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
>   of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
>
>   This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>   but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>   MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>   GNU General Public License for more details.
>
>   You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
>   along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
>   Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
> 02110-1301, USA.
>
>   http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0-standalone.html
>
> ***************************************************************************************/
>
> --
> Henryk Konsek
> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
>

I'd remove the copyright line as it would most likely be wrong in most cases.

Daniel Kulp
http://dankulp.com/blog


On Jul 5, 2012, at 5:50 PM, Christian Müller <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Before we do a camel-extra 2.10.0 release, I would like to discuss to
> change the license header in camel-extra to the following one. It's the GNU
> v2 license header template:
>
> /**************************************************************************************
>  Copyright (C) 2008 - 2012 Camel Extra Team.
>  http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/camel-extra/
>
>  This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
>  modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
>  as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
>  of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
>
>  This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>  but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>  MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>  GNU General Public License for more details.
>
>  You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
>  along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
>  Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
> 02110-1301, USA.
>
>  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0-standalone.html
> ***************************************************************************************/
>
> And if you have some minutes/hours free, could you try to get the
> maven-rat-plugin (version 0.8) working with the new license headers? It
> should be possible to refer to a custom license header but I didn't got it
> working until now:
> http://ci.apache.org/projects/rat/apache-rat-plugin/examples/custom-license.html
>
> Best,
> Christian
>
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Henryk Konsek <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>> When we tag camel-extra 2.10.0, we have to update the version to 2.10.0
>> in
>>> camel-extra too. For this, we need the Camel 2.10.0 artifacts (not only
>> in
>>> a staging repo).
>>
>> So Camel 2.10.0 arrived to Central [1]. Can I tag 2.10.0 version of
>> Camel-Extra then? I can almost hear Maven release:prepare goal begging
>> me to execute it :) .
>>
>> [1] http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/camel/camel-core/2.10.0
>>
>> --
>> Henryk Konsek
>> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
>>
>