commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release commons-compress-1.0 based on RC1
Date Mon, 11 May 2009 12:45:42 GMT
On 11/05/2009, Christian Grobmeier <> wrote:
> Hi all,
>  as already discussed, I just created a RC1 for the first [compress] release :-)
>  Let me know if you can find any problems.
>  Cheers,
>  Christian
>  Tag:

I don't like the use of final tag names for release candidates; tags
should be immutable, so how can one generate another release candidate
if this one fails?

I'm not sure what the solution to this is as I don't know enough Maven.

For the record, I have done the testing against "last changed revision: 773463"

>  Site:

Could not find any reference to the required JVM version.

Also the front page still refers partly to sandbox status:

# The code is unreleased
# Methods and classes can and will appear and disappear without warning
# If you like the code and want to push it towards a release, join the
mailing list!

Those both need to be fixed before live deployment of the site, but
are not release blockers.

>  Binaries:

Hashes of sigs (.asc.md5 and .asc.sha1) are created by Maven, but
should be deleted as they serve no purpose.

Hashes and sigs are OK.

NOTICE file mentions products that came via the Ant project. I'm not
sure that's necessary, as Ant is an ASF project, but it probably does
no harm.

jRPM appears to use AL 1.1 rather than AL 2.0, so the license text
from the jrpm project should be added to LICENSE file.

The OSGI information in commons-compress-1.0.jar looks wrong - surely
the compress packages should only be listed in the Export section, and
not the Import section as well?

Presumably this is a pom.xml config error rather than a plugin error,
but I have no idea how to fix it.

I think the Import section should be empty, as compress has no
dependencies (apart from junit for testing). I don't know if that
means it should be omitted, or just left empty.

It would be nice if the source and javadoc manifest files contained
the Implementation and Specification details as provided in the binary
jar, but that is not essential. I'll see if I can find out how to add
this. does not have an AL header.

Some of the test files don't have AL headers either, but that's probably OK.

One test failure:

junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: length of
C:\DOCUME~1\User\LOCALS~1\Temp\dir20685\test1.xml expected:<80> but

Perhaps this is an EOL issue?

Not a blocker.

>  [ ] +1 release it
>  [ ] +0 go ahead I don't care
>  [X] -1 no, do not release it because

I think there's no point releasing with the OSGI error.
Also the jRPM LICENSE needs to be added, and the missing AL header.

Hopefully also fix the source and javadoc manifests as well as the test failure.

>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>  For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message