hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release HttpComponents Client 4.4-alpha1 based on RC1
Date Fri, 27 Jun 2014 16:56:37 GMT
I'm inclined to agree with Gary that the site is important as a help
when reviewing the RC.

Apart from the RAT report, there is the Clirr report.

Also, the RC VOTE e-mail should contain the KEYS URL.
Yes, I know I can hunt around and find it, but it should really be
present to enable the sigs to be checked.

[BTW, I now have a shell script which can automatically check sigs
against a specific KEYS file.
I can add that to SVN somewhere if it would be of use to others]


On 27 June 2014 17:25, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-06-27 at 11:57 -0400, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, 2014-06-27 at 10:57 -0400, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > On Fri, 2014-06-27 at 10:19 -0400, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> > > > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Gary Gregory <
>> > garydgregory@gmail.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski <
>> > olegk@apache.org>
>> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> On Fri, 2014-06-27 at 08:17 -0400, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> > > > > >> > Why no site?
>> > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> *sigh* because site is not part of release artifacts.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Yes, but as part of the release process it would help reviewing
>> > the RC
>> > > > by
>> > > > > > looking at reports.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > For example, how do I know all files have the right license header
>> > > > without
>> > > > > a RAT report?
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Like, by running RAT against the source dist, no?
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > Hm, I consider it part of the RM's duty to create all of these reports.
>> > >
>> > > The people how VOTE can inspect the reports...
>> > >
>> >
>> > RM's duty based on what? RM's duty is produce release artifacts. Nether
>> > site content nor reports of any sort are not release artifacts.
>> >
>>
>> I beg to differ. By not producing Maven reports for RAT, FindBugs, PMD,
>> Surefire and so on, you are making the job of reviewers harder, not easier.
>> Over at Commons and Logging, we produce a full site with reports as part of
>> a VOTE.
>>
>
> You are very welcome to do so. However, we have a certain release
> process, too [1]. You are also very welcome to propose improvements to
> that process and add things you deem important if they are missing. But
> pointing out that something has not been done in a _release vote_ is not
> very constructive, is it? If it is not a blocker, can we discuss it
> _after_ the vote and actually move on with the vote? If it is a blocker
> by all of means feel free to vote accordingly.
>
> Oleg
>
> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/HttpComponents/HttpComponentsReleaseProcess
>
>> Is every reviewer going to manually run a Maven RAT report? I doubt it, and
>> in the case of RAT, it is a crucial part of the process.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Oleg
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org


Mime
View raw message