We can consider adding release notes to the source/svn, but I personally
like keeping it externally on the website. This way we can update
release notes if we find something after the fact that we forgot to add
or discovered post release. We can also more easily include links to
bugs or additional documentation about new features, which isn't as easy
in a normal text file.
For the build instructions, the README references BUILD.md on our github
page which has development dependencies and setup instructions for
different OS:
https://github.com/apache/daffodil/blob/main/BUILD.md
On 12/2/21 12:18 PM, Christofer Dutz wrote:
+1 (binding)
Built on Windows 10 with OpenJDK 11.0.13, SBT 1.5.5
Chris
[MINOR] Download all staged artifacts under the url specified in the release
vote email.
- Would be nice to have the RELEASE_NOTES and README in the SVN
[MINOR] Verify the signature is correct.
- No trust-chain to the ASF web-of-trust (Consider joining an Apache
Key-Signing Party)
[OK] Check if the signature references an Apache email address.
[OK] Verify the SHA512 hashes.
[OK] Unzip the archive.
[MINOR] Verify the existence of LICENSE, NOTICE, README, RELEASE_NOTES files in
the extracted source bundle.
- Would be nice to have RELEASE_NOTES
[MINOR] Verify the content of LICENSE, NOTICE, README, RELEASE_NOTES files in
the extracted source bundle.
- When sources are included from outside, except for the DTDs, no source (like
a gitub link) is provided where the code came from. This makes truly verifying
LICENSE and NOTICE a bit tricky (or not possible).
[MINOR] [RM] Verify the staged source README, RELEASE_NOTE files correspond to
those in the extracted source bundle.
- As there are no files in the SVN, nothing to compare.
[OK] [RM] Run RAT externally to ensure there are no surprises.
[OK] Search for SNAPSHOT references: Only found some in the dummy website copy
in the integration-tests
[OK] Search for Copyright references, and if they are in headers, make sure
these files containing them are mentioned in the LICENSE file.
[MINOR] Build the project according to the information in the README.md file.
- Tried building it, certainly didn't get it right especially cause I couldn't find any
"Setup for development" guide that tells a user which software he needs (ok ..
you list the software in the readme, but not where to get it from and how to set it up)
- In the plc4x project we have something like this:
http://plc4x.apache.org/developers/preparing/index.html
- And we also have automatically executed scripts in place that verify all is
setup correctly:
https://github.com/apache/plc4x/blob/develop/src/main/script/prerequisiteCheck.groovy
(This makes it a lot easier for users to get started ... might be worth
considering)
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Beckerle <mbecke...@apache.org>
Sent: Mittwoch, 1. Dezember 2021 20:04
To: dev@daffodil.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache Daffodil 3.2.0-rc1
Hi all,
I'd like to call a vote to release Apache Daffodil 3.2.0-rc1.
All distribution packages, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/daffodil/3.2.0-rc1/
Staging artifacts can be found at:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachedaffodil-1025/
This release has been signed with PGP key 13A680AF, corresponding to
mbecke...@apache.org, which is included in the KEYS file here:
https://downloads.apache.org/daffodil/KEYS
The release candidate has been tagged in git with v3.2.0-rc1.
For reference, here is a list of all closed JIRAs tagged with 3.2.0:
https://s.apache.org/daffodil-issues-3.2.0
For a summary of the changes in this release, see:
https://daffodil.apache.org/releases/3.2.0/
Please review and vote. The vote will be open for at least 72 hours (Monday
December 6, 14:00 EST.US).
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Thanks,
- Mike Beckerle
