Skip to content

why don't we use sbt-sonatype? #37

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
SethTisue opened this issue Feb 2, 2018 · 6 comments
Closed

why don't we use sbt-sonatype? #37

SethTisue opened this issue Feb 2, 2018 · 6 comments

Comments

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member

what's the advantage of going through bintray-sbt, given that ultimately the artifacts are destined for Sonatype instead?

as @xerial points out, using sbt-sonatype could save us the trouble of having to use the Sonatype web UI to close and release the staging repos. that costs an extra 5 minutes or so (longer if it's been a while and we need to remember exactly how it goes).

currently we use the manual step:

  • as an opportunity for last-second sanity-checking
  • as a way for the Scala team to retain control over the final step, instead of ceding it entirely to community maintainers? I'm not actually sure if this was an intentional aspect of this process, or it just sort of turned out that way?
@jvican
Copy link
Member

jvican commented Feb 2, 2018

You may want to use sbt-release-early, which protects you against common pitfalls, has great docs, and improves upon sbt-sonatype in several ways, allowing you to customize the release pipeline and double checking release invariants before an actual push to Sonatype. https://github.com/scalacenter/sbt-release-early/wiki

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

resolved by @lrytz in #65 (by using sbt-ci-release, which includes sbt-sonatype)

@lrytz
Copy link
Member

lrytz commented Sep 12, 2019 via email

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

ha, I see now that the ticket description I wrote is confused between those two interpretations

for the record,

  • the "projects using the plugin" interpretation is what is now fixed
  • as for the "release the plugin" interpretation, I think sbt plugins are normally published to bintray and there's no reason I know of to change that

@lrytz
Copy link
Member

lrytz commented Sep 12, 2019

👍 that's fine with me. publishing to bintray is really simple once it's set up, i find.

https://github.com/olafurpg/sbt-ci-release#how-do-i-publish-sbt-plugins suggests publishing sbt plugins to maven central is also common these days.

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

SethTisue commented Feb 8, 2021

since Bintray is going away, I ended up doing this in #121 — we are now publishing the plugin itself using sbt-ci-release (which incorporates sbt-sonatype)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants