I'd say this is ok - everything we put in the releases was developed
before the New Year.
But this is a good catch - we need to update the files in the repo
going forward.
Andrus
On Jan 11, 2007, at 7:03 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
A little late, but I just noticed that the copyright statements
haven't
been updated for 2007. I imagine only the files that have actually
been
changed within then last 11 days need to be updated, and based on
commit
messages, it doesn't seem like many.
The modeler, however, looks a bit odd saying that the copyright years
are 2001 - 2006 with the version string below saying (January 10
2007).
Someone smarter than me can decide whether there really is an issue
here
or not.
--
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 11:14 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [VOTE] 1.2.2 and 2.0.2 releases
VOTE: approve 1.2.2 and 2.0.2 releases.
http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/2.0.2/
I posted artifacts for 1.2.2 and 2.0.2 releases. Note that
1.2.2 is not "Apache-compliant" and will be released from
SourceForge. There is no signatures for 1.2.2 artifacts
either. Still doing a vote on the entire thing, as the code
is maintained by the same group of committers.
Kevin and myself did some regression testing. The results are
shown below. If you have access to Oracle, Sybase or DB2, you
may run tests from the corresponding tags and report the results.
1.2.2:
hsqldb (passed)
derby (passed)
mysql (passed)
postgresql (passed)
frontbase (one failure [1])
sqlserver (passed)
2.0.2:
hsqldb (passed)
derby (passed)
mysql (passed)
postgresql (passed)
frontbase (one failure [1])
sqlserver (passed)
Andrus
[1] https://issues.apache.org/cayenne/browse/CAY-729
