[hibernate-dev] HHH-12172 - Bintray v. OSSRH

[Steve Ebersole]

Agreed.  So unless someone has an argument against, I will plan on
switching over to Bintray publishing for the next 5.3 release.

This means we will need to update the older versions we still want to
release to publish to Bintray.  Gail, that's just which versions?


On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:35 AM Sanne Grinovero <sanne at hibernate.org> wrote:

> On 19 January 2018 at 14:56, Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org> wrote:
> > I think it is reasonable to only publish the maven artifacts to Bintray
> and
> > continue to publish the bundles to SourceForge.
>
> Great, so that means we can have about a thousand releases on Bintray;
> should be enough for all our projects for at least 10 years.
>
> Thanks,
> Sanne
>
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 7:19 AM Sanne Grinovero <sanne at hibernate.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 19 January 2018 at 13:05, Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org>
> wrote:
> >> > I sat down and did some calculations to get a better idea of whether
> >> > this is
> >> > feasible.  5.3.0.Beta1 had a total size of 135M (31M in "maven
> >> > artifacts",
> >> > 104 in release bundles).  At 30G limit, we'd be able to do ~222
> releases
> >> > before we hit that limit (30 / .135 = 222.2222)
> >> >
> >> > So if only ORM is going to move to Bintray, I think the 30G limit is
> not
> >> > a
> >> > hindrance.  Do we see other projects moving away from publishing to
> >> > JBoss
> >> > Nexus, and if so what publishing repo do y'all plan to use?
> >>
> >> Yes, as I said before I'm neutral on which one we use, but I was
> >> somewhat expecting us to all eventually use the same solution.
> >> Seems important to be consistent for sake of end user's experience,
> >> but also for us to share tooling, scripts, practices, lessons
> >> learned..
> >>
> >> That said we didn't start looking at that in other Hibernate projects
> >> so there would certainly be a lag.
> >>
> >> The work we're doing on feature-packs might significantly reduce the
> >> size of each release, but I think it will only have an impact on the
> >> "maven artifacts", which according to your estimates are not the main
> >> issue.
> >>
> >> Maybe we could stick to sourceforge for the release bundles? We all
> >> seems to agree that "release bundles" are meant for the more "old
> >> school" devs; I'd say they won't be swayed away from Sourceforge
> >> anyway, and we should probably keep some continuity there.
> >> That would also happen to solve the storage limit problem?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Sanne
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 2:21 PM Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Bintray said they would increase the storage limit to 30G for
> >> >> Hibernate.
> >> >> However that limit is per organization, which is the top-level thing
> >> >> (https://bintray.com/hibernate).  I think we'd eat that up in no
> time,
> >> >> especially if other projects plan on moving to Bintray at any time.
> >> >>
> >> >> One way around that would be to have each project be its own Bintray
> >> >> organization.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 7:33 AM Gunnar Morling <gunnar at hibernate.org
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 2018-01-12 12:59 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero <sanne at hibernate.org>:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > Personally I'm neutral. I surely wouldn't want to manage our own
> >> >>> > Artifactory, but since JFrog will do that I'm not concerned about
> >> >>> > the
> >> >>> > platform management being horrible.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Artifactory looks better, OSSRH has the benefit of possibly having
> >> >>> > better integration with Maven.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > There are some benefits on staying to JBoss's nexus though; not
> >> >>> > expressing a strong opinion but let's clarify these.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > # Stats
> >> >>> > We need download statistics, which I understand they all offer,
> but
> >> >>> > an
> >> >>> > absolute number is not as useful as being able to compare the
> >> >>> > numbers
> >> >>> > in one dashboard across various others of our projects.
> >> >>> > Also not looking forward to have to login to multiple systems to
> >> >>> > gather
> >> >>> > it
> >> >>> > all.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > # Quality control of artifacts
> >> >>> > I'm understanding that JBoss Nexus does several strict validations
> >> >>> > on
> >> >>> > our poms; sure they have been in the way as it's not nice to see
> >> >>> > such
> >> >>> > failures *during* a release but there's an upside to them as well.
> >> >>> > AFAIK OSSRH also has similar rules, but the JBoss team one has
> >> >>> > different ones, plus a deal with Sonatype to deem our stuff good
> >> >>> > "pre-approved" so we don't have to satisfy the Sonatype rules too.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > # Signing
> >> >>> > Also I'm understanding that to release on OSSRH we need to sign
> all
> >> >>> > artifacts; not a bad idea but it's quite more papework and key
> >> >>> > management. Such paperwork is handled for us by the JBoss Nexus
> >> >>> > team.
> >> >>> > We'd need to install GPG on our release servers, get a
> organization
> >> >>> > RSA key signed, and people stubbornly releasing manually will have
> >> >>> > to
> >> >>> > create a key each, and have it approved by Sonatype.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Debezium already is released to OSSRH from our CI server. May be
> worth
> >> >>> chatting to Jiri (added him to CC) about the details of setup. Note
> >> >>> there's
> >> >>> no need for key approval by Sonatype (at least last time I did it),
> >> >>> you
> >> >>> only need to publish them to some key server which you can do all by
> >> >>> yourself.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Not against migrating if this is what you all want - just making
> >> >>> > sure
> >> >>> > we're keeping these into account.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Thanks,
> >> >>> > Sanne
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > On 12 January 2018 at 02:47, Brett Meyer <brett at hibernate.org>
> >> >>> > wrote:
> >> >>> > > Sorry for the late and probably irrelevant response...
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > We're using an in-house Artifactory instance at a gig and it's
> >> >>> > > been
> >> >>> > > trash.  I can't speak to the UI or management end, nor Bintray,
> >> >>> > > but
> >> >>> > > Artifactory's platform doesn't seem as polished (can't believe I
> >> >>> > > just
> >> >>> > > said that) or stable (can't believe I said that either) as Nexus
> >> >>> > > (what
> >> >>> > > is happening).
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > I use OSSRH for some minor projects and have generally had
> decent
> >> >>> > > luck
> >> >>> > > -- including a few interactions with the support team that went
> >> >>> > > well.
> >> >>> > > OSSRH != JBoss Nexus, although I definitely understand the
> >> >>> > > wounds...
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > On 12/19/17 8:34 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> >> >>> > >> HHH-12172 is about moving away from the JBoss Nexus repo for
> >> >>> > >> publishing
> >> >>> > our
> >> >>> > >> artifacts.  There is an open question about which service to
> use
> >> >>> > instead -
> >> >>> > >> Sonatype's OSSRH (Nexus) or JFrog's Bintray (Artifactory).
> >> >>> > >>
> >> >>> > >> Personally I think Artifactory is far superior of a
> UI/platform.
> >> >>> > >> We
> >> >>> > >> all
> >> >>> > >> know Nexus from the JBoss deployment of it, and we have all
> >> >>> > >> generally
> >> >>> > had
> >> >>> > >> nothing good to say about it.
> >> >>> > >>
> >> >>> > >> But I am wondering if anyone has practical experience with
> >> >>> > >> either,
> >> >>> > >> or
> >> >>> > knows
> >> >>> > >> persons/projects tyay do and could share their experiences.
> >> >>> > >> E.g.,
> >> >>> > >> even
> >> >>> > >> though I prefer Bintray in almost every regard, I am very
> nervous
> >> >>> > >> that
> >> >>> > it
> >> >>> > >> seems next to impossible to get help/support with it.  The same
> >> >>> > >> may
> >> >>> > >> be
> >> >>> > true
> >> >>> > >> with OSSRH - I don't know, hence why I am asking ;)
> >> >>> > >> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> > >> hibernate-dev mailing list
> >> >>> > >> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >>> > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > _______________________________________________
> >> >>> > > hibernate-dev mailing list
> >> >>> > > hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >>> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> >> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >> >>> > hibernate-dev mailing list
> >> >>> > hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> hibernate-dev mailing list
> >> >>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>