incubator-s4-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Gomez Ferro <danie...@yahoo-inc.com>
Subject Re: S4 0.6.0 RC4 proposal
Date Mon, 08 Apr 2013 16:00:36 GMT
Hi,

I think having only the source release is fine, since the binary was
provided just for convenience.

Good work on fixing all these issues for the new RC, I have no objections
for a new vote.

Regards,

Daniel

On 4/6/13 12:31 PM, "Matthieu Morel" <mmorel@apache.org> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I integrated comments and addressed problems pointed out in S4 0.6.0 RC3
>and prepared a new release candidate, RC4.
>
>This release candidate only includes source artifacts, so that we avoid
>any licensing issues, because it is the recommended package to use (it
>avoids issues with missing dependencies) and because it's not clear to me
>how to easily add headers to some of the files gradle is generating.
>
>Artifacts are available here:
>http://people.apache.org/~mmorel/s4-0.6.0-incubating-release-candidate-4/
>
>Updates :
>- renamed NOTICE.txt into NOTICE
>- removed release notes from distribution, but updated tags in that file
>for html compliance
>- removed gradle from the source distribution
>- updated instructions in the documentation for  creating the gradle
>wrapper since it's not included anymore
>- added license headers to all files, including log config and data test
>files
>- updated KEYS file
>
>I also took take of previous comments related to a bin release (which we
>wouldn't provide):
>- listed all non-ASF libraries that use ASL license in the LICENSE file
>for a binary release (different from the LICENSE file of a source
>release).
>- specified version number of dependencies
>
>... and also updated the .rat-excludes file for minimizing exclusions
>
>
>What do you think of this approach (no binary release)?
>
>
>If there are not objections, I'll propose a new vote on this new release
>candidate.
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Matthieu
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message