My own vote:

 +1

Signature: ok
Checksum: ok
Machine: macos/intel, erlang 26

make check: ok
generate release, start bin/couchdb, _utils, verify installation: ok

Cheers,
-Nick

On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 3:42 PM Ronny Berndt <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> +1
>
> Signatures: ok
> Checksums: match
>
> Build Machine: Edition Windows Server 2022 Datacenter / Version 21H2
>
> Some known test fail under Windows.
>
> ####### SOFTWARE VERSIONS #######
> "26"
> Erlang/OTP 26 [erts-14.2.5.11] [source] [64-bit] [smp:8:8] [ds:8:8:10]
> [async-threads:1] [jit:ns]
>
> Elixir 1.18.3 (compiled with Erlang/OTP 26)
> Python 3.11.9
> openjdk version "21.0.9" 2025-10-21 LTS
> OpenJDK Runtime Environment Zulu21.46+19-CA (build 21.0.9+10-LTS)
> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM Zulu21.46+19-CA (build 21.0.9+10-LTS, mixed mode,
> sharing)
> #################################
>
>
> Best, Ronny
>
> Am Do., 6. Nov. 2025 um 04:58 Uhr schrieb Nick Vatamaniuc <
> [email protected]>:
>
> > Dear community,
> >
> > I would like to propose that we release Apache CouchDB 3.5.1
> >
> > Candidate release notes:
> >     https://docs.couchdb.org/en/3.5.x/whatsnew/3.5.html
> >
> > We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> > artefacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> > release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so dig
> > right in! (Only PMC members have binding votes, but they depend on
> > community feedback to gauge if an official release is ready to be
> > made.)
> >
> > The release artefacts we are voting on are available here:
> >
> >   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/couchdb/source/3.5.1/rc1/
> >
> > There, you will find a tarball, a GPG signature, and the SHA256 checksum.
> >
> > Please follow the test procedure here:
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COUCHDB/Testing+a+Source+Release
> >
> > Please remember that "RC1" is an annotation. If the vote passes, these
> > artefacts will be released as Apache CouchDB 3.5.1
> >
> > Please cast your votes now.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Nick
> >

Reply via email to