Mailing-List: contact dev-help@felix.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@felix.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of heavy@ungoverned.org designates
 69.89.22.17 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <479D48ED.8090404@ungoverned.org>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:15:57 -0500
From: "Richard S. Hall" <heavy@ungoverned.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071115)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@felix.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Felix 1.0.2 framework and main release as well as
 bundlerepository
 1.0.1 release
References: <487a994c0801271604w43fc1c4bwdb67c910766f5f46@mail.gmail.com>
 <81f0d9c0801271906p3c05c11q8bcf33a4c8637112@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <81f0d9c0801271906p3c05c11q8bcf33a4c8637112@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Stuart McCulloch wrote:
> On 28/01/2008, Karl Pauls <karlpauls@gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> I would like to call a vote on the framework and main 1.0.2 as well as
>> on the bundlerepository 1.0.1
>> release.  The source release archives, signature files, SHA and MD5
>> message digests for each are available as zip and tar.gz here:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~pauls/felix-1.0.2.html
>>
>> Additionally, a binary release is included on the page as a
>> convenience download as well as the framework, main, and
>> bundlerepository binaries and poms in
>> order to make them available via maven.
>>
>> Please vote to approve these release archives:
>>
>> [ ] +1 Approve the Felix 1.0.2 framework and main releases as well as
>> the bundlerepository 1.0.1 release.
>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>>
>>     
>
> sorry: -1 for 1.0.2, as unfortunately I found an issue when running RAT:
>
>    framework-1.0.2
> /src/main/java/org/apache/felix/framework/util/CompoundEnumeration.java
>   

Crap. I had originally added the header to that file, but I did a revert 
and a re-apply of the patch and forgot to do it again.

> is lacking a license header ...also, should this properties file have a
> license header?
>
>    framework-1.0.2
> /src/main/resources/org/apache/felix/framework/Felix.properties
>   

We never have and since this only has the version number in it, I don't 
think it can be construed as being in any way creative, so I don't think 
it needs a license header.

I guess we will have to see what Karl wants to do about the above.

-> richard
> however, I can vote +1 for the bundlerepository 1.0.1 release, as everything
> checks out ok
>
>