incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Eggent 1.2.0-incubating
Date Mon, 11 Dec 2017 12:02:48 GMT
Hi Seb,

we have stopped distributing binary release archives as with this release we’ll be starting
to use Maven for distributing binary artifacts:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheedgent-1002/org/apache/edgent/edgent-parent/1.2.0/

And the difference to the legal files (LICENSE and NOTICE) are probably due to a lot of work
we have put into making the new build comply to the Apache rules.
The Maven migration took about 2 Months while fine-tuning the legal things took about 4 months
where Justin helped us greatly with resolving any issues.

So, I removed the LICENSE file and here’s the revision to vote on: 23497


Chris


Am 11.12.17, 12:50 schrieb "sebb" <sebbaz@gmail.com>:

    On 11 December 2017 at 11:33, Christofer Dutz <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de> wrote:
    > Hi Seb,
    >
    > starting with Edgent 1.2.0 we have switched the build system to Maven. Therefore,
the build is now generating output with the default Maven settings.
    > So instead of adjusting the names for every future release, would it be better to
change the names of the existing ones?
    
    What names are you referring to?
    
    > I also did notice the old releases were not including LICENSE, README and RELEASE_NOTES,
but according to our wiki:
    > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EDGENT/Release+Manager%27s+Guide#ReleaseManager'sGuide-StagingtheReleaseCandidate
    > I thought this was probably some requirement added after the last release. Would
you suggest removing the 3 text files and adjust the RC documentation accordingly or to add
the NOTICE and adjust the RC documentation?
    
    README and RELEASE_NOTES are fine.
    
    It's only the LICENSE that is a problem (for me, at least).
    
    Also I just noticed that the RC [5] only has source whereas the
    previous release [2] has source and binaries.
    If this release is to include binaries, they should be provided for review.
    
    Further, the previous release [2] has a different source LICENSE from RC1.
    Is that correct?
    
    
    > I’ll post the revision as soon as above have been addresses.
    >
    > Chris
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Am 11.12.17, 12:07 schrieb "sebb" <sebbaz@gmail.com>:
    >
    >     The mail subject is wrong.
    >
    >     On 11 December 2017 at 09:39, Christofer Dutz <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>
wrote:
    >     > The Apache Edgent community approved a vote to release
    >     > Apache Edgent 1.2.0-incubating from RC1.
    >     >
    >     > Per [1] we are requesting IPMC approval to publish the
    >     > release bundles on the distribution site [2].
    >     >
    >     > This vote will be open for 72 hours
    >     >
    >
    >     at least
    >
    >     > - 1.2.0-incubating-RC1 vote results / thread [3]
    >     > - Git hash and tag for the release
    >     > commit: e37ca5216e7f4d464cfcd45c9826b6d99791c974
    >     > tag: edgent-1.2.0
    >     > link to RC1 source in the git repository [4]
    >     > - links to RC1 artifacts [5]
    >     >
    >     > [ ] +1 accept
    >     > [ ] -1 reject (explanation required)
    >     >
    >     > Thanks for your assistance in achieving this milestone!
    >     >
    >     > [1] policy http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases
    >     > [2] distribution https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/edgent/
    >     > [3] rc1 vote https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ad39f8cad1f7238964c515777d7b6b4792e32dc44e428dcebb91b709@%3Cdev.edgent.apache.org%3E
    >     > [4] rc1 src repo https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-edgent.git;a=tree;h=b9d54b562b92e2112270d79ec89ba6bd85063ae0;hb=e37ca5216e7f4d464cfcd45c9826b6d99791c974
    >     > [5] rc1 artifacts https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/edgent/1.2.0-incubating/rc1/
    >
    >     The revision is needed to make this unique
    >
    >     The LICENSE file is not normally published separately from the archives.
    >     In any case, it must be accompanied by the NOTICE file.
    >
    >     Also the layout is different from [2]
    >     It would be better to keep to the same layout, so the release can be
    >     published with a simple rename from dev to release.
    >
    >     >
    >     >
    >     >
    >     >
    >
    >     ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    >     To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
    >     For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
    > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
    
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
    For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
    
    


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Mime
View raw message