Hi. On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 11:25:00AM +0100, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > Le 04/03/2012 03:35, Gilles Sadowski a écrit : > > Hello. > > > > Please review the deliverables for Math 3.0. > > > > Tag: > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/math/tags/MATH_3_0_RC2/ > > > > Site: > > http://people.apache.org/builds/commons/math/3.0/RC2/ > > > > Binaries: > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-050/org/apache/commons/commons-math3/3.0/ > > > > [ ] +1 Release it. > > [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care. > > -0. > There are a few minor glitches. > > - the binary distribution archives commons-math3-3.0-bin.tar.gz > and commons-math3-3.0-bin.zip contain both 3.0 and 3.0-SNAPSHOT > files (commons-math3-3.0.jar, commons-math3-3.0-SNAPSHOT-javadoc.jar, > commons-math3-3.0-sources.jar, commons-math3-3.0-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar, > commons-math3-3.0-javadoc.jar and > commons-math3-3.0/commons-math3-3.0-SNAPSHOT.jar
I must have forgotten a "clean" in command stream. > - there is one checkstyle warning about a wrong order in > BaseAbstractUnivariateIntegrator: the protected iterations field is > declared before several other fields which are now final in the RC > (they are protected in the trunk, so I did not fixed this, it depends > on whether another RC is done or not) I hope that we can let this in. > - The site at http://people.apache.org/builds/commons/math/3.0/RC2/ > seems to be missing many files (there is only one changes-report.html > file and four subdirectories: apidocs, css, images and style) I had the feeling that the directory was not quite right (but at the late hour, it did not ring a bell...). I forgot to run "mvn site" before "mvn site:stage-deploy". > As what we release are sources and binary files are only a convenience, > I don't know if this should be considered a blocker or not, hence the -0. I've uploaded a new batch. The source tree was not changed, so I hope that it is OK to refer to the same tag. > Also note that Nexus automatically adds md5 and sha1 checksum to the asc > signature files. These signatures on signatures are spurious and should > be manually removed from Nexus staging area. Also done. > Anyway, this is a very good job, Gilles. Thanks for your quick response. Gilles --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
