incubator-kato-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ant elder <>
Subject Re: Second release candidate.
Date Sun, 13 Dec 2009 10:05:11 GMT
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Stuart Monteith <> wrote:
> Hi,
>    I've put together another release candidate.
> The tag is here:
> The files are here:
> I believe I've addressed all of the issues raised on the mailing list, with
> the exception of the large dump that was generated when run under Harmony.
> In addition, I've not put up the tomcat package, which is just demo code and
> needs more explanation.
> I've also expanded on the rat reports to report on the Windows and Linux
> native packages separately.
> i.e.:
> rat-bin-linux.txt
> rat-bin-windows.txt
> rat-bin.txt
> rat-src.txt
> I also added the MD5 checksums too, as they apparently must be there.
> There have been a number of changes. The TCK is available to run now, CJVMTI
> has been fixed to address most of the issues found. I also added the
> corrections suggested by Andrew Johnson (spelling errors, an other
> indisputable points).
> We are to go through the licensing and source audits.
> Mentors - can you refresh my memory as to what actions we should take next?

To release the artifacts they need to be voted on. The way thats
commonly done is first having a vote on the poddling dev@ mailing list
and then if that passes then hold a vote on the Incubator general@
list. There must be vote on the general@ list and from the two votes
there must be at least three +1s from IPMC members. Sometimes to avoid
the overhead of two votes the votes are run in parrallel by just
cc'ing both lists on the one vote email. You can also just email
general@ asking for review comments without actually holding a vote,
depending on who's around and active you may get comments but often
people are busy and wont find the time till there's actually a [VOTE]

I've had a look at the artifacts, the NOTICE file still isn't perfect,
i probably wasn't as clear as i could have been in the RC1 comments -
the NOTICE file should start with the: Project Name,  ASF copyright,
and product includes... statement. so:

Apache Kato
Copyright 2009 The Apache Software Foundation

This product includes software developed by The Apache Software
Foundation (

and then any Kato specific notices. The HTTPD project is often given
as an example, see one of their NOTICE files at:

Its also good for every downloadable artifact to include a README and
RELEASE_NOTES file so is easy to find what the artifact is for and
whats changed in this release of it, but those are missing in some of
these Kato artifacts.

Part of doing releases is working out when to ask for reviews and when
to calling votes. There's a balance that needs to be found between
wasting time rebuilding the release, waiting for comments, and calling
votes too often so people stop bothering looking as they assume its
not ready and there'll be a next vote they can review.


View raw message