felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Custine <chris.cust...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Karaf 1.4.0
Date Tue, 23 Feb 2010 22:29:58 GMT
I think the copyright is worth cutting a new release for, so I am canceling
this vote and will start a new one shortly.

Chris

--
Chris Custine
FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com
My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com
Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org
Apache Felix :: http://felix.apache.org
Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org


On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 18:33, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Eventually I found the source archives at
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-010/org/apache/felix/karaf/apache-felix-karaf/1.4.0/apache-felix-karaf-1.4.0-src.tar.gz
> >
> > The layout of this archive seems a bit peculiar, but I can build it.
>
> Not sure why you say the archive is peculiar, it looks as the usual one to
> me.
>
> >
> > The following file is found by rat:check to be missing license headers:
> >
> > deployer/blueprint/src/test/resources/test.xml
> >
> > The copyright date in the root NOTICE file is 2009
> >
> > My understanding of best practice for NOTICE files is that they should
> refer
> > to only what is in the artifact they are in.  So the root NOTICE file
> would
> > be better if it left out the "Used Software" section and the license
> > summary.  I also don't think its appropriate to include license info in
> the
> > NOTICE file unless it's required by the included software NOTICE; this
> > applies to all the NOTICE files.
>
> Yeah and that's how the Felix PMC has decided to work with NOTICE files
> AFAIK.
> There has been some discussions about changing that but no decision so far
> IIRC.
>
> >
> > I find the duplicated legal files in root and src to be confusing.  Why
> not
> > just use the standard source distro from the apache 7 pom apache-release
> > profile?
>
> The goal is to have clean generated notice files.
> In addition, as a felix subproject, we need to have felix-parent as
> the parent-pom.
> Not sure what the apache 7 changes, but we
>
> >
> > I'd advise fixing these problems and re-rolling the release.
>
> I'm +1 for the release.
>
> > thanks
> > david jencks
> >
> >
> > On Feb 19, 2010, at 12:39 AM, Chris Custine wrote:
> >
> >> The Karaf 1.4.0 artifacts have been staged for release.
> >>
> >> Release notes are here:
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310100&styleName=Html&version=12314410
> >>
> >> Staging repository:
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-010/
> >>
> >> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the
> >> signatures:
> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
> >>
> >> Usage:
> >> sh check_staged_release.sh 010 /tmp/felix-staging
> >>
> >> Please vote to approve this release:
> >>
> >> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> >> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
> >>
> >> This vote will be open for 72 hours.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Chris Custine
> >> FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com
> >> My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com
> >> Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org
> >> Apache Felix :: http://felix.apache.org
> >> Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>

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