incubator-blur-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron McCurry <amccu...@gmail.com>
Subject [CANCELED] [VOTE] Release Blur version 0.2.0-incubating
Date Sun, 15 Sep 2013 19:39:00 GMT
I have decided to cancel this vote and call another.  That way there is a
clean vote with the correct links to everything.

Aaron

On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Aaron McCurry <amccurry@gmail.com> wrote:

> Here's the commit to fix the LICENSE and NOTICE issue.
>
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-blur.git;a=commit;h=1925af6e06ff48ac8780b627b3f78e9a16c8c17c
>
> I have fixed the project so that the LICENSE and NOTICE in the root of the
> project is now the source versions (they use to be the binary versions).
>  The binary versions are now located in the
> 'distribution/src/main/resources' directory.
>
> The updated source and binary files:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/blur/0.2.0-incubating/
>
> The updated tag is:
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-blur.git;a=tag;h=8c402a8ea04242f1c727b6157a836f9862f71c4c
>
> Thanks,
>
> Aaron
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Aaron McCurry <amccurry@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Patrick or Tim.  Should I cancel this vote and call another?  Or should I
>> just post an updated hash for tag to this vote?  The artifacts are going to
>> be different (obviously) as well as the hash for the tag.
>>
>> Aaron
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Aaron McCurry <amccurry@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, thanks Patrick I will take a look at the assembly today and report
>>> back.  Thanks.
>>>
>>> Aaron
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 11:23 PM, Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> -1. Things look great however I noticed that the source artifact
>>>> includes the same LICENSE/NOTICE as the binary artifact. You only want
>>>> to include LICENSE/NOTICE specific for the artifact. (the jars listed
>>>> in these two files are not included in the src artifact for example,
>>>> js is included in both so it's correct to include that in the LIC/NOT
>>>> for both, etc...)
>>>>
>>>> If this is addressed I don't see any other issue that would keep me
>>>> from +1'ing the release at this point.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Patrick
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Aaron McCurry <amccurry@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > This is the second release candidate for Apache Blur, version
>>>> > 0.2.0-incubating.
>>>> >
>>>> > It fixes the following issues:
>>>> > http://incubator.apache.org/blur/docs/0.2.0/release-notes.html
>>>> >
>>>> > *** Please download, test and vote by [3 working days after sending].
>>>> >
>>>> > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided
>>>> for
>>>> > convenience.
>>>> >
>>>> > Source and binary files:
>>>> >
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/blur/0.2.0-incubating/
>>>> >
>>>> > The tag to be voted upon:
>>>> >
>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-blur.git;a=tag;h=1a1ca843409ca5d46182af7f136f2b4541f6462d
>>>> >
>>>> > Blur's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
>>>> >
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/blur/0.2.0-incubating/KEYS
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

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