commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.2 RC1 as 2.2
Date Tue, 18 Feb 2014 18:51:28 GMT
On 18/02/2014 18:24, sebb wrote:
> On 17 February 2014 20:42, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org> wrote:
>> 2.2 fixes a few bugs and adds a new testOnCreate() feature that is
>> required by DBCP 2.
>>
>>
>> The Pool 2.2 RC1 is available for review here:
>>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/ (r4424)
> 
> Sigs and hashes OK.
> Source archive agrees with SVN tag apart from as noted below
> 
>> Maven artifacts are here:
>>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1008
>>
>> Details of changes since 2.1 are in the release notes and changelog:
>>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>>   http://people.apache.org/~markt/dev/pool-2.2-RC1-site/changes-report.html
>>
>>  The tag is here:
>>   http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_2_RC1/
>>   (r 1569090)
> 
> Some shell scripts and download_pool.cgi have SVN eol=native.
> Any objections if I change these to LF in trunk?

Yes. What is the point? eol=native means they are easier to work with.

> The shell scripts are missing from the source release - I assume that
> is intentional?

If you mean the pool*.sh scripts then yes.

> However, 3 source files in SVN doc/ folder are missing from the source release.
> I don't think that should be the case.

Agreed. Need to figure out how to get those included.

> The doap file is also not in the source release; that is to be expected.
> 
>>  Site:
>>   http://people.apache.org/~markt/dev/pool-2.2-RC1-site
>>   (Broken links to Javadoc versions expected)
> 
> The Clirr report shows two errors.
> These are due to updating the interfaces
> GenericKeyedObjectPoolMXBean
> and
> GenericObjectPoolMXBean
> 
> The Javadoc for these interfaces states that they are subject to
> change between major releases.
> However this is a minor release.
> 
> The Clirr errors need to be explained in the Release Notes.
> Do they have an impact on user code?
> If not, why not?

No, they don't. We went through this for the 2.1 release. See the
archives for why this is OK.

> @since 2.2 markers are present where relevant.

Thanks for the review. I'll look into getting those files added to the
source distro.

Mark


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message