Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hc.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "HttpComponents Project" <dev@hc.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of sebbaz@gmail.com designates
 74.125.82.51 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1411498424.27961.6.camel@ubuntu>
References: <1411051471.14984.1.camel@ubuntu>
	<CACZkXPxUaVv6GiyNNvKjkkZ_mFsse0LLWWPea5EeR1JQneNOPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1411217373.21236.4.camel@ubuntu>
	<CAOGo0VZkAyDLxAdOvyh+F3HrsOeznwAOoOazW=s43pRiCc3_CA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1411294969.28923.2.camel@ubuntu>
	<CAOGo0VZrLK97t6Ttd1T+5JjY8z12Hqc1osqFps7d=43OinJXAQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1411297118.28923.5.camel@ubuntu>
	<CAOGo0VZ-nHSpwyixOsU_w=QpnGgpXPDey6sEUp5G_ALLroZ9TQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1411298864.28923.12.camel@ubuntu>
	<CAOGo0VaGKK=rx_FcBsaRTWFfuPUpnxszT=h_k=XK61hDtKgnAA@mail.gmail.com>
	<85316e61-40e1-4978-9d3f-b02f2e8a1420@email.android.com>
	<CAOGo0VZ=V96Mm8HOe62+=yvtO-=i_RJ02qGgeaOtXuU7nsB_zg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACZkXPwfNuoGeO5Lva+kz4_X-+b2byz+fO2TVyU+usAzrQAX8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<1411498424.27961.6.camel@ubuntu>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 23:16:16 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAOGo0VaCRjLiQMpW2PV0wSUvM68=oJvbWq_s_M+h8M5shmjFTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release HttpComponents Core 4.4-beta1 based on RC1
From: sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>
To: HttpComponents Project <dev@hc.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 23 September 2014 19:53, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-09-23 at 13:00 -0400, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:40 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >>> But as I said before you are welcome to extend release tools to
>> > >>generate
>> > >>> whatever reports you desire.
>> > >>
>> > >>Just because I report an issue with a process does not mean I have to
>> > >>be the one to fix it.
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > Right. Naturally it is better to have other people do useless work than
>> > do useless work yourself.
>> >
>> > It is not useless work.
>> > The RM must - and reviewers should - run the RAT and Clirr checks.
>> > This needs to be documented as part of the release voting.
>> >
>>
>> I agree that the RM and reviewers must run or check these reports.
>> It sure would waste less time if the reports were provided or instructions
>> provided (I added some instructions to BUILDING.txt files yesterday FWIW).
>>
>> Gary
>>
>
> Gary
>
> As both of us just found our reports generated by RM and those generated
> locally by a reviewer may not always match.

In which case we need to find out why this is happening, and fix the problem.

I also get an error running RAT on httpcore trunk unless I run mvn clean first.

If I run it again, RAT complains about target/rat.txt files.
No idea why this should be; I would expect target/* to be excluded
wherever it occurs in the tree.

>  What really matters is
> whether or not the source tarball compiles and passes the checks for
> _you_. Reports published by RM are useless and a waste of RM time.
>
> If something is still unclear we should work on improving BUILDING.txt
> instructions.
>
> 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