cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Willem Jiang" <>
Subject Re: Release manager for 2.1.3 and/or 2.0.9.....
Date Fri, 03 Oct 2008 03:51:46 GMT
Hi Dan,

I'd like to take charge of this CXF release.
Since you and me met a year before, I will send you my key for signing :)



On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 12:49 AM, Daniel Kulp <> wrote:

> We're rappidly approaching time to do the 2.0.9 and 2.1.3 releases.
> It's been about 10 week since 2.0.9 and 7 weeks since 2.1.2.   We have
> 33 issues resolved for 2.0.9, and 38 for 2.1.3.   Thus, we probably
> should consider doing some releases shortly.
> HOWEVER, my hard drive crashed this week and part of recovering from
> that, I kind of realized that someone else really should try doing a
> release to make sure the knowledge is spread out a bit and isn't all
> bottled up in my head.    Thus, I'd like to ask for volunteers for doing
> the releases.   If no one jumps up, I'll be happy to do it, but it would
> definitely be good to get someone else involved.
> Requirements:
> 1) The release process is MUCH easier and more reliable on a Linux or OSX
> box.   Things like gpg and ssh/scp "just work".  If someone want to try
> Windows, I'm not sure how much I can help.
> 2) gpg installed and a gpg key generated and available in the public key
> servers.   Ideally, it would be signed by other apache folks, but that's
> not a requirment.  Anyone near Boston, we could meet for lunch and sign
> keys if you want.
> 3) Time - before building the release, you need a few hours to review
> release notes, notice/license files, rat reports, etc....   Post
> release, there is syncing to the maven repo, updating confluence, some
> JIRA admin things, etc....   Basically, a few hours ahead of the build,
> an hour to build, three days for the vote, and a few hours afterword.
> Anyway, if anyone is interested, speak up.  I'd be happy to look over
> your virtual shoulder while you do the stuff to make sure it's all done
> right.   Not a problem.
> Thanks!
> --
> J. Daniel Kulp

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message