openwhisk-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vincent S Hou" <s...@us.ibm.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Date Thu, 05 Jul 2018 21:49:36 GMT
Thank Dave for the vote and comments. I am updating the doc now to make it more straightforward.

I vote +1 as well to release OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2 module

Checklist for reference:
[ X ] Download links are valid.(Please disregard the md5 link, since we do not need it)
[ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ X ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.

 
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)

Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud

Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States

-----"David P Grove" <groved@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: "David P Grove" <groved@us.ibm.com>
Date: 07/03/2018 06:22PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module

I vote

+1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating

Checklist for reference:
[ X ] Download links are valid.
[ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
[ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ X ] All files have license headers if necessary.  (assuming I ran
scancode correctly...see below).
[ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.

I also verified that the release built on MacOS and that I could deploy it
an invoke the echo message per the release documentation.

Two very small things that could be improved in the release documentation
file.  I do not see either of these as release blockers (thus the +1 vote).

(1)  In the "Run OpenWhisk" section, it uses both `wsk` and `bin/wsk`.  We
should probably either say `$OPENWHISK_HOME/bin/wsk` uniformly or say that
we assume that the user has put the wsk CLI on their path.

(2) I think it would be better to include the exact commands for running
scancode to verify that all files have license headers instead of
referencing the scancode tutorial.  For example, I am not 100% positive if
by following the tutorial (see shell transcript below) really checked the
right rules or if I needed to invoke scancode with a specific configuration
file.

--dave

daves-mbp-3:incubator-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating dgrove$ python
~/code/openwhisk/incubator-openwhisk-utilities/scancode/scanCode.py .
Reading configuration file
[/Users/dgrove/code/openwhisk/incubator-openwhisk-utilities/scancode/scanCode.cfg]...
Scanning files starting at [.]...
All checks passed.


Mime
View raw message