harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexei Fedotov <alexei.fedo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [vote] Declare the signed source for r782693 as Milestone 10
Date Tue, 09 Jun 2009 22:00:34 GMT
Mark,
Thanks for explaining.




On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 1:28 AM, Mark
Hindess<mark.hindess@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> In message <c30d70960906091313k25a8f5d6gc7d9c7e9f6fe0a5e@mail.gmail.com>,
> Alexei Fedotov writes:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> > If the vote is successful, binary builds from that level will be
>> > made available on the download page, as usual.
>>
>> I'm sorry. Do I understand correctly that no binary builds are
>> available now?
>
> No, not yet.  This time we are trying to do things the Apache way
> so we'll make them if/when we decide we are happy with the (source)
> release.
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html says:
>
>  The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
>  releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
>  changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/bytecode
>  packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might
>  not have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the
>  source. In all such cases, the binary/bytecode package must have
>  the same version number as the source release and may only add
>  binary/bytecode files that are the result of compiling that version of
>  the source code release.
>
> It would be permissible to produce binary artefacts at the same time
> as the source (as long as they are produced from the source artefacts
> not from the svn tree used to create them).  I was tempted but, IMNSHO,
> doing so would inevitably lead to people assessing the wrong artefacts
> and neglecting the all-important source artefacts.
>
> I do some sanity checking before asking for a vote but I intend to make
> the full use of the 3 days of voting to do more testing.  If/when I vote
> +1 it will be based on my downloading both the tar.gz and zip, checking
> the signature/hash files, building them for x86 and x86_64, running
> our tests, running some simple scenarios with applications (eclipse
> 3.4, the latest eclipse RC, groovy, tomcat, etc), etc.
>
> Everyone has their own reasons for voting[0].  This is fine; voting is
> a matter of individual "conscience".  However, personally, I'd rather
> people voted based on their own experience - with the artefacts they are
> voting on - rather than trusting others (although there will always be
> some element of trust[1]).
>
> Regards,
>  Mark.
>
> [0] I notice the number of votes significantly outnumbers the number
>    of downloads (and there are even fewer downloads of the
>    signature/hash files).
>
> [1] I trust that someone else will test on Windows.
>
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Tim Ellison<t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Looks good.
>> >
>> > +1 from me.
>> >
>> > Mark Hindess wrote:
>> >> I've fixed the "java -version" issue and created two signed source
>> >> archives for this revision and made them available at:
>> >>
>> >>   http://people.apache.org/~hindessm/m10/
>> >>
>> >> Please vote for declaring these source archives as milestone 10, and
>> >> opening up the code for general development once again.
>> >>
>> >> This vote will be open for at least 3 days, or until all binding votes
>> >> have been cast (if earlier).
>> >>
>> >> If the vote is successful, binary builds from that level will be made
>> >> available on the download page, as usual.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >>  Mark.
>
>
>



-- 
With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями,
Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов,
http://www.telecom-express.ru/
http://harmony.apache.org/
http://code.google.com/p/openmeetings/

Mime
View raw message