directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Release JUnit Add-ons 0.1 - take 2
Date Wed, 09 Feb 2011 18:51:06 GMT
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Stefan Seelmann <seelmann@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Stefan Seelmann <seelmann@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Hi devs,
>>>
>>> I'd like to release the first version of our JUnit Add-ons.
>>>
>>> The JUnit Add-ons contain helpers for concurrent unit test that are
>>> used only internally.
>>>
>>> Please note that it includes source files copied from [3], licensed
>>> under ALv2. According to [4] the original copyright notice and license
>>> header is unchanged. Attribution has been added to NOTICE and LICENSE
>>> file.
>>>
>>> The tag can be found at [1], the staging repository can be found at [2].
>>>
>>> I'll continue to release the staging repository after the grace period
>>> of 4 hours.
>>>
>>> Kind Regards,
>>> Stefan
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/directory/buildtools/junit-addons/tags/0.1/
>>> [2] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachedirectory-046/
>>> [3] http://code.google.com/p/mycila/source/browse/mycila-junit/tags/mycila-junit-1.0.ga/src/main/java/com/mycila/junit/concurrent
>>> [4] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party
>>>
>>
>> Hold on a second. We need a formal vote on this!
>>
>> The 4 hour exception to the 72 hour vote process is just for the TLP
>> pom. The TLP pom does not have the same legal requirements as a
>> standard src/bin release artifact.
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/DIRxDEV/top-level-pom-management-policy.html
>>
>> There needs to be a review of the release artifact and the 72 vote
>> period is mandatory. I'm really sorry to say this but we have to roll
>> back this release and follow the standard operating procedures.
>
> My understanding was that we agreed to release the internal projects
> with the simplified process [5], we did multiple releases this way,
> including a src/bin artifact [6].
>
> But I agree that this isn't/wasn't a simple release an a more formal
> vote should have beed done, sorry for my fault.

Please take it easy, this is not your personal responsibility. And we
caught it so no one died. It's something the PMC is responsible for.

Back in October I did not give your email enough consideration and
voted +1 on [6]. I thought all the artifacts were like the TLP pom.
Skins, check config files and some tooling configurations to use
existing JUnit extensions that already existed.

Only now did it occur to me that it's not so simple. I see code being
copied from 3rd party projects into the junit project and we're
releasing it. That triggered me to pay more attention.

> [5] http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@directory.apache.org/msg29764.html
> [6] http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@directory.apache.org/msg29861.html

No worries we'll fix this. Also the rule should ONLY be for the TLP
pom because of the technical drawbacks of resolving snapshot poms.
Let's set this line in the sand and not cross it together.

BTW we should not need a release to update the skins. Skins are not an
official release that's a product. They're just resources for our
project. We can tag and use them on our site.

Thanks,
Alex

Mime
View raw message