incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James M Snell <>
Subject Re: Abdera 0.1.0 Release Candidate (please review)
Date Mon, 31 Jul 2006 17:54:37 GMT
Hey Robert,

Thanks for the excellent feedback.  At this point I believe we've
addressed all of the issues you raised and should be re-roll the zips

- James

robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 7/26/06, James M Snell <> wrote:
>> The Abdera podling has reached a point where the committers feel we're
>> ready to cut a 0.1.0 "developer preview" / "developer milestone"
>> release.  We have +1's from all committers [1] and zero -1's.
>> The release candidate is available at:
>> Java5 and JDK 1.4.2 versions are available, as well as a source
>> distribution.  All source contains appropriate copyright statements and,
>> as far as I know, all dependency requirements have been met.
>> Ant and Maven build options are available.
>> Given that this is the first release, please forgive me if I have missed
>> a step in here somewhere,
> there's a lot of documentation that hasn't been written up yet do i'll
> certainly do that :-)
>> but from what I understand, the next step is
>> to ask y'all to review and approve the release candidate.
> i note that you haven't included sample MD5 sums and signatures.
> that's fine if you're confident.
> a few notes on best practice for future reference:
> * the binary and source distributions should unpack to directories
> with different names. this makes things more convenient for people who
> download both source and binary versions. also makes it more obvious
> when the source is downloaded. conventionally the source would unpack
> to abdera-x.y.z-incubator-src.
> * list supported build tool versions (ant and maven) in the build
> README (doesn't work with installation of maven 1.0.2)
> * the MANIFEST files should comply with the various java standards on
> this matter. these are really a long way away so i can't list just a
> few corrections. creating complient releases should be included in the
> release management guide very soon but for now see
> important notes
> * there are no license or notice files in the jars distributed in the
> binary. though this is not necessarily a blocking issue, these
> artifacts cannot be distributed as raw jars without them. therefore
> these jars cannot be distributed through maven. if you want to do
> this, you must include LICENSE and NOTICE files in the jars.
> blocking issues
> * copyright headers missing from too many source files (pom.xmls,
> build.xmls, numerous xml and xslt files, docs/*.html). not all of
> these files will be substantial enough for copyright to exist in them
> but IMHO there are so many that this should be addressed before
> releasing.
> IMO the license headers should be addressed before this release
> - robert
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message