Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 370F310A70 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 21:57:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 31864 invoked by uid 500); 25 Sep 2013 21:57:10 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 31771 invoked by uid 500); 25 Sep 2013 21:57:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@accumulo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 31722 invoked by uid 99); 25 Sep 2013 21:57:04 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 21:57:04 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of josh.elser@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.44 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.160.44] (HELO mail-pb0-f44.google.com) (209.85.160.44) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 21:57:00 +0000 Received: by mail-pb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id xa7so237752pbc.31 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:56:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=vWiRW/0is6UkRr16M3i5CvsQXLkNy9zJSNLYxQCz0ZI=; b=MUhRIh1mYvhxr3gayS7tvEpZsz7j4Kr1jPxO+YvhlPd02mrKkAbcLrIgYOdRFPXOXQ fGDZYPOCqkVZZOhbRqhpsZwf76xxgaGvJQxXTy0iLiOMjXL2L3oAHbpWH5gTWsxYW3Fk L768u/imEeNjLZmG1BInDSERLLzWOpKAcqa3yFMREE54+xKTZSRNPcudw+CJ61NJYby/ 2CHdOY322bd88SrEAQE1WLigpDLBJcawNo0gX5Dx/YAewQHxBApPK5yxvHa22thZHeVx DJwT7a1UPkRceRJ5xjMfisP5ekooNJgvBw/zZPj0xmOn1Z3DBm8053rhVenNL6wt0ZmH YLEg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.69.0.229 with SMTP id bb5mr12872939pbd.179.1380146200052; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:56:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.12.3 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:56:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.12.3 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:56:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <523FAA79.6000803@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:56:39 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [VOTE] Accumulo Instamo Archetype 1.4.4 RC2 From: Josh Elser To: dev@accumulo.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b2e1119fe0c2304e73c53e1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --047d7b2e1119fe0c2304e73c53e1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sep 25, 2013 12:10 PM, "Christopher" wrote: > > MD5s and SHA1s look good, and so does the GPG signatures. > > I saw the following issues: > > 1) No javadoc jar (should be defined in the "apache-release" profile). So it would seem that `mvn deploy -Papache-release` isn't sufficient? > 2) Tarball looks like it isn't using gnu tar format. This could cause > problems with long filenames on some systems. You need the following > in your pluginManagement section: > > org.apache.maven.plugins > maven-assembly-plugin > > gnu > > > (I really don't know why that isn't the default. This might be > addressed with the "apache-release" profile) x.x > 3) What's the deal with the #set lines at the top of the file? What do > these do? Are these needed? Because ShellExample.java is missing them. > Is that expected? > 4) There appears to be two distinct READMEs. Would it be better to > consolidate them? No. One is for the archetype and one is for the code generated by the archetype. Completely different IMO. > 5) There appears to be a discrepancy between the LICENSE and NOTICE > files that are in the project and the archetype-resources. I'd expect > them to be the same. I'll check into that. > 6) I can't see the commit you referenced above, because it hasn't been > pushed. You should push it in another branch, if you don't want to tag > it, so I can compare the source in that commit with the contents of > the tarball, before it's actually tagged as "1.4.4" upon vote success. I guess I forgot to push tags? > 7) It looks like the release plugin put in the wrong tag name > ("1.4.4-RC2" instead of "1.4.4"). This was intentional. I do not like deleting tags at all. The intent I took from our last discussion was to provide a commit (which I must have forgotten to push?) and make a real 1.4.4 tag when the vote succeeds. > 8) I think the attaching sources is redundant, because it's configured > in the parent POM's "apache-release" profile. I don't follow (not in front of code either). > Overall, -1, due to the above issues (though they are all minor, they add up). > > -- > Christopher L Tubbs II > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > > > On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 10:42 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > > Devs, > > > > Please consider the following candidate project as a "sister" release to > > Apache Accumulo 1.4.4: Apache Accumulo Instamo Archetype 1.4.4 > > > > Staging repo: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheaccumulo-089/ > > Source tarball: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheaccumulo-089/org/apache/accumulo/instamo-archetype/1.4.4/instamo-archetype-1.4.4-source-release.tar.gz > > Git tag: 56e3c674674dc2521a76dce2466360b1f82ca0ea (1.4.4-RC2) > > > > This release has improvements over the last release candidate: > > > > 1) Update archetype's pom to the most recent Apache pom > > 2) Generates source-release zip and tarball automatically > > 3) Don't push changes on release:prepare > > > > This vote is open for 72hrs. > > > > - Josh --047d7b2e1119fe0c2304e73c53e1--