Better document this. Pffff sorry dude. B.
Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad > Op 15 dec. 2017 om 22:17 heeft Chris Riccomini <criccom...@apache.org> het > volgende geschreven: > > The artifact version has an rc6 in it. I suppose we need to re-vote. Sigh. > >> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Bolke de Bruin <bdbr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Ehmmmm >> >> Renaming the file is fine, but the artifacts inside should stay the same. >> You cannot change what we voted on. So basically if the SHA/MD5 changes we >> need to vote :-(. >> >> Tbh I did not look at the artifact description (version.py primarily, it >> should have read 1.9.0). >> >> Have a look at the mailing list history and how Max did it last time, >> because it changed a little bit, so I might be off a little. >> >> Cheers >> Bolke >> >> Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad >> >>> Op 15 dec. 2017 om 21:43 heeft Chris Riccomini <criccom...@apache.org> >> het volgende geschreven: >>> >>> Hey all, >>> >>> For 1.9.0, RC6 has passed the vote. Does anyone recall what the protocol >> is >>> for releasing it? I believe I need to re-build the artifacts to remove >> the >>> 'rc6' from the release. IIRC, we don't need to re-vote for this, do we? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Chris >>
