incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Approve the M1 release of Apache Stonehenge
Date Thu, 14 May 2009 15:17:11 GMT
On 14/05/2009, Selvaratnam Uthaiyashankar <> wrote:
> Hi,
>  The Apache Stonehenge community has voted for the M1 release of Apache
>  Stonehenge. We are now asking the approval from the Incubator PMC to publish
>  the release.
>  Stonehenge is a set of example applications for Service Oriented
>  Architecture that spans languages and platforms and demonstrates best
>  practise and interoperability.
>  I have uploaded the Apache Stonehenge M1 release artifacts here:

MD5 hashes and sigs OK, key is published to keyserver.
Might be worth adding SHA1 hashes, but not essential.

The contents of the binary zip and tar.gz files do not agree - the
tar.gz archive does not include any of the dotnet files. Agreed it's
more likely that .NET users will be using Zip, but the tgz archive
should still contain the same contents.

If you want to release a version without .NET, then IMO the archive
should have a different name, and should be made available in all
archive formats.

IMO this needs to be fixed before a release.

The source and binary files contain several PDF files, but these are
not present in SVN.

There should be nothing in a source archive that does not come from
SVN, and the contents of the source archive should contain "... the
source materials needed to make changes to the software being
released" - see

I'm not sure how this need to be handled, but I don't think it can be
left as is.
Perhaps check on legal-discuss?

>  The key is here:
>  RAT reports are here:

Where are the RAT reports for documentation and ruby?

Most of the documentation files are missing AL headers.

IMO this needs to be fixed before a release.

>  This release is tagged at:
>  (revision 772495)

There need to be NOTICE and LICENSE files at the top-level of the tag.

That will also make up for the missing N & L files in the
documentation sub-tree.

IMO this needs to be fixed before a release.

Otherwise the N&L files seem OK.


There does not seem to be any mention of the runtime system
requirements on the web-site - the dependencies page says that there
are no dependencies.

This is not a release-blocker.


There are a lot of .java, .xml  and .xsd files in SVN which don't have
This does not affect the release process in any way, but it should
make cross-platform development easier if the properties were added.

>  The release vote on the stonehenge-dev mailing list resulted in *nine* +1
>  votes and no 0 or -1 votes.
>  +1 votes are from
>  *Paul Fremantle
>  *Chintana Wilamuna
>  *Ben Dewey
>  *Drew Baird
>  *Nandana Mihindukulasooriya
>  *Kent Brown
>  *Kamaljit Bath
>  *Scott Golightly
>  *Selvaratnam Uthaiyashankar
>  This includes one IPMC vote from:
>  *Paul Fremantle
>  Vote Mail is here:
>  Vote Thread is here:
>  More information about the project can be found here:
>  [Incubation Status Page]
>  [Project Page]
>  Please vote to approve this release.
>  [] +1 Publish
>  [] +0
>  [] -0
>  [X] -1 Don't publish

See above.

>  Regards,
>  Shankar

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

View raw message