Thanks， jiashun，
So, this vote is closed， as one -1. We failed for this release。
We will update it and build another release again。
在 2019/8/8 下午1:05，“JiashunZhu”<zhujiashun2...@gmail.com> 写入:
-1.
LICENSE of some 3rd party code(such as crc32c.h/cc) are missing in brpc
LICENSE.
tan zhongyi <zhongyi....@gmail.com> 于2019年8月1日周四 下午10:27写道：
> Hi, guys,
>
>
>
> I am pleased to be calling this vote for the release of apache
> brpc(incubating) 0.9.6-rc01.
>
>
> The source code can be found at:
>
>
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/brpc/0.9.6-rc01/apache-brpc-0.9.6.rc01-incubating-src.tar.gz
>
>
> The release candidate has been tagged in GitHub as 0.9.6-rc01, available
> here:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-brpc/releases/tag/0.9.6-rc01
>
>
> The SHA-512 checksum is:
>
>
>
c5ea90429ddee685bc1a39a83784da564172127750329b6d5d7660fc31be9cb6d38699e44c3afa756aaf231ad183e4bc9d6b9e41846244a371a4079b632778b2
>
> which can be found via:
>
>
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/brpc/0.9.6-rc01/apache-brpc-0.9.6.rc01-incubating-src.tar.gz.sha512
>
>
>
> The signature can be found via:
>
>
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/brpc/0.9.6-rc01/apache-brpc-0.9.6.rc01-incubating-src.tar.gz.asc
>
>
>
> KEYS file is available here:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/brpc/KEYS
>
>
>
>
>
> [Release Note]
>
>
>
> * Health (of a connection) can be checked at rpc-level
> * Fix SSL-related compilation issues on Mac
> * Support SSL-replacement lib MesaLink
> * Support consistent hashing with ketama algo.
> * bvar variables can be exported for prometheus services
> * String[Multi]Splitter supports '\0' as separator
> * Support for bilibili discovery service
> * Improved CircuitBreaker
> * grpc impl. supports timeout
>
>
>
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as:
>
> Apache brpc(incubating) 0.9.6-rc01
>
>
>
> This vote will be open until “Mon Oct 05 2019 00:00:00 GMT+0800 (CST)" and
>
> passes if a majority of at least three +1 Apache brpc IPMC votes are
>
> cast.
>
>
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package
>
> [ ] 0 I don't feel strongly about it, but don't object
>
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ]Are release files in correct location?
> [ ]Do release files have the word incubating in their name?
> [ ] Are the digital signature and hashes correct?
> [ ] Does DISCLAIMER file exist?
> [ ]Do LICENSE and NOTICE files exists?
> [ ] Is the LICENSE and NOTICE text correct?
> [ ] Is the NOTICE year correct?
> [ ] Un-included software dependencies are not mentioned in LICENSE or
> NOTICE?
> [ ] License information is not mentioned in NOTICE?
> Is there any 3rd party code contained inside the release? If so:
> [ ] Does the software have a compatible license?
> [ ] Are all software licenses mentioned in LICENSE?
> [ ] Is the full text of the licenses (or pointers to it) in LICENSE?
> Is any of this code Apache licensed? Do they have NOTICE files? If so:
> [ ]Have relevant parts of those NOTICE files been added to this NOTICE
> file?
> [ ]Do all source files have ASF headers?
> [ ] Do the contents of the release match with what's tagged in version
> control?
> [ ] Are there any unexpected binary files in the release?
> [ ] Can you compile from source? Are the instruction clear?
>
>
>
>
> Anyone can participate in testing and voting, not just committers, please
>
> feel free to try out the release candidate and provide your votes.
>
> Thanks
>
>
--
Jiashun Zhu
