Create releases more often #1123
Comments
|
@team172011 should we consider cutting a 0.16 release? We could also come up with a regular release cadence. |
|
Any news here? Any plans for a release? Or any plans to keep snapshot deployments with timestamps? |
|
I haven't heard from Simon but I'll assume the lack of pushback as acquiescence. I'll take a look at this shortly. |
|
Unfortunately I don't seem to have access to perform releases. Will need to punt to @team172011 |
|
@team172011 have you had a chance to look at this yet? Can I help anyhow? |
|
C'mon, am I the only one who finds that a bit disappointing? What's stopping you from creating a release? Again, I'm willing to help. |
|
There's not much you can do as it's a permissions issue. No one active can publish releases to Nexus. I could potentially release it under a new project ID but that's unpalatable as it would break continuity. |
|
is the real problem that @team172011 disappeared? Or just doesn't care anymore? |
|
Given lack of info I prefer to assume the best in others. He could very
well be swamped with other work, real life priorities, etc. Ultimately we
all do this on a voluntary basis, and no one “owes” anyone else anything.
He will get to it whenever he can and in the meanwhile we just need to deal
with it or think outside the box.
…On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 9:59 AM Francesco ***@***.***> wrote:
is the real problem that @team172011 <https://github.com/team172011>
disappeared? Or just doesn't care anymore?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1123 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABQJ6FP7DV6U6W2MXJ6FP23YWXMTZAVCNFSM6AAAAAA76OVMAWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSNZYHE3DKMRQG4>
.
You are receiving this because you were assigned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
When I say disappear I meant went to live to Maldives without internet and with the money made with a ta4j bot, so positive thinking here too. |
|
Hi everyone, I came across this amazing project and started using it. I am just realising that the latest version released (and the one using my project) is more than 2 years old. I came across this discussion. I think I have some issues due to fixes not bein in V0.15 release. Will this project be supported still? Should I start thinking on forking it and using a custom version? |
|
I have accidentally started 1.0-SNAPSHOT. If you are interested in performance optimizations for backtesting and live trading. Different usecases needs different solutions. #1148 I was trying to be backward compatible, but I had to do a cut in favor to fix some design decisions. I like this library, but it can be nice-tuned much more :) |
|
I love the effort but I am not sure it's humanly possible to review a PR of 563 file changes with +44,564 lines and −43,944 lines. My suggestion is to break it up into much smaller PRs. But I am no-one here, just giving you my advice. |
|
I agree, but PR touches core concepts that requires changes in almost all places. If I commmit just part, it will not compile. Maybe someday I can find a way how to commit things separately. For now, my goal is to adapt all current code and verify that it really works in efficient manner. It must pass:
Therefore I just created a draft PR as window to my WIP on proof of concept. May be wrong and I will throw it away. May be "game changer" and we can find a way how to merge differnet paths. May be something between and we can cherrypick the best into separate PRs. |
|
I like these improvements, but I think this is another reason to come back to the original topic of this thread. When (or if) the permission issue is resolved, as a first step v0.16 should be released. Afterwards one of the first updates for v0.17-SNAPSHOT could be your improvements @sgflt. But same as @francescopeloi I'm also only a ta4j user and just share my thoughts here. |
|
I have submitted a request to Sonatype support inquiring if/how I can inherit the org.ta4j namespace. Barring this we'd have to create and publish under a new namespace which is far from ideal. |
|
|
|
Will there be also jars? And will the release also be published on Maven central repository? |
|
0.16 is already on Maven central repo.
…On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 6:44 AM Cypher01 ***@***.***> wrote:
Will there be also jars? And will the release also be published on Maven
central repository?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1123 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABQJ6FJACS5WTZHOL2N4CG3ZDMQPDAVCNFSM6AAAAAA76OVMAWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCMRSGMZTENJUHE>
.
You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
|
|
Didn't show up on my side, I think it was a problem with browser cache, sorry. Now I see it, thx a lot! |
|
As for jars, I'll have to look into the process as it doesn't appear to be an automatic attachment by Github release. I can manually upload a locally built jar but that doesn't seem right. |
|
I would simply take the jars from Maven central repository (ta4j-core, ta4j-examples), download the 3 jars each and attatch to the release, same as release 0.15. |
|
While that will work it, like the locally built artifacts approach, is a
bit too manual for my liking. I’m looking into a Github Actions workflow
that will automate the entire process, including generating the release
notes, attaching the artifacts, etc
…On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 3:51 AM Cypher01 ***@***.***> wrote:
I would simply take the jars from Maven central repository (ta4j-core
<https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/ta4j/ta4j-core/0.16/>, ta4j-examples
<https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/ta4j/ta4j-examples/0.16/>), download
the 3 jars each and attatch to the release, same as release 0.15.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1123 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABQJ6FIJGRJF6IZ77B4HLWLZDRE6PAVCNFSM6AAAAAA76OVMAWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCMRUGEYDKNBQGY>
.
You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
|
Simple request, please create releases more often.
0.15 is already over a year old and when adding 0.16-SNAPSHOT to Maven, on every build one can never be sure what version to get and what (potentially breaking) changes.
If you don't want to create final releases, at least make it possible to use a specific snapshot by date or month. Afaik it's possible to configure Nexus to not overwrite deployments, but keep all with a timestamp.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: