So are your issues just the licensing and release page? That is all I was
seeing was wondering if maybe I missed something. I was working on the release
page for the daffodil-site I just didn't get it pushed up, will do that now. I
can also add these license issues found to the notice/license files and release
rc2 or were you saying this can wait till next release?
On 2022/07/29 18:01:49 Steve Lawrence wrote:
> -1 (binding)
>
> I'm also having trouble getting things running, I think maybe the setup
> just isn't very intuitive. I assume I'm just doing something wrong.
>
> However, I also found some potential licensing issues, the main reason
> for my -1 vote--maybe I'm doing something wrong looking at the yarn
> licenses output?
>
> I checked:
>
> [OK] hashes and signatures of source and helper binaries are correct
> [OK] signature of git tag is correct
> [OK] source release matches git tag
> [OK] source compiles using yarn package
> [OK] compiled source matches convenience binary exactly (except for
> timestamps in zip file)
> [OK] RAT check passes
> [OK] no unexpected binaries in source
> [OK] vsix installs without error
> [OK] No open CVE's found using sbt-dependency-check plugin (except for
> false positives)
>
> [FAILED] Page for release published on website
>
> - There is no page at daffodil.apache.org/vscode for this release.
> Please create one so this can be reviewed as part of the VOTE
> process.
>
> [FAILED] src and binaries include correct LICENSE/NOTICE
>
> - The build/extension.webpack.config.js file is marked as MIT, but is
> not listed in the LICENSE file (can be fixed as part of next release)
> - All the omega-edit and daffodil bundled jars look correct in the
> build.package/{LICENSE,NOTICE} files, but running 'yarn licenses
> list --production` lists many npm dependencies that are not listed.
> I thought we fixed everything for last release, so I'm not sure why
> this is the case? Maybe some dependency updates pulled in new
> transitive dependencies that weren't caught? None are category X,
> but I think they should be listed in the appropriate LICENSE/NOTICE
> file. Here is the output of the above command, including only the
> things that are missing from LICENSE/NOTICE:
>
> BSD-3-Clause
> ├─ @protobufjs/[email protected]
> ├─ @protobufjs/[email protected]
> ├─ @protobufjs/[email protected]
> ├─ @protobufjs/[email protected]
> ├─ @protobufjs/[email protected]
> ├─ @protobufjs/[email protected]
> ├─ @protobufjs/[email protected]
> ├─ @protobufjs/[email protected]
> ├─ @protobufjs/[email protected]
> ├─ @protobufjs/[email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> └─ [email protected]
> ISC
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> └─ [email protected]
> MIT
> ├─ @types/[email protected]
> ├─ @types/[email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> ├─ [email protected]
> └─ [email protected]
>
> If I'm just doing something wrong, I'm happy to switch my vote to a
> +1. The other checks I mention can be fixed as part of the next
> release.
>
>
> On 7/29/22 1:10 PM, Mike Beckerle wrote:
> > I'd like to request more time for this vote.
> >
> > I have only limited time today to check this release out, and limited
> > connectivity today as I am on Amtrak with spotty wifi at best.
> >
> > I don't want to vote yet, because something seemingly environmental is
> > impeding
> > my ability to evaluate.
> >
> > Obviously this works for others or it wouldn't be an RC, but I am /not
> > getting
> > it to even start working/. I will need some assistance to get past this.
> >
> > I have uninstalled VSCode, setup to use Java 11. I have rebooted my PC
> > (ubuntu).
> > I have fully deleted ~/.vscode, and then I have reinstalled vscode.
> > Then I install the release VSIX, and still, I can get nowhere.
> >
> > No Daffodil command from the command palette does anything other than give
> > an
> > error.
> >
> > If I choose Daffodil Debug File from the command palette, I'm immediately
> > getting "ENOENT: no such file or directory, lstat".
> >
> > I tried also to select Daffodil Debugger, configure launch.json but I get:
> >
> > image.png
> > (btw: what is 'launch.config'? Shouldn't that say 'launch.json'?)
> >
> > So something is up environmentally; I can't even test out the features yet.
> >
> > -mike beckerle
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 2:21 PM Shane Dell <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> > Hello all,I'd like to call a vote to release Apache Daffodil VS Code
> > 1.1.0-rc1.
> >
> > All distribution packages, including signatures, digests, etc. can be
> > found at:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/daffodil/daffodil-vscode/1.1.0-rc1/
> >
> > <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/daffodil/daffodil-vscode/1.1.0-rc1/>
> >
> > This release has been signed with PGP key
> > 86DDE7B41291E380237934F007570D3ADC76D51B, corresponding
> > to [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>, which is
> > included in
> > the KEYS file here:
> > https://downloads.apache.org/daffodil/KEYS
> > <https://downloads.apache.org/daffodil/KEYS>
> >
> > The release candidate has been tagged in git with 1.1.0-rc1.
> >
> > For reference, here is a list of all closed GitHub issues tagged with
> > 1.1.0:
> > https://github.com/apache/daffodil-vscode/milestone/2?closed=1
> > <https://github.com/apache/daffodil-vscode/milestone/2?closed=1>
> >
> > Please review and vote. The vote will be open for at least 72 hours
> > (Saturday, 30 July 2022, 3 Noon EST).
> >
> > [ ] +1 approve
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > - Shane Dell
> >
>
>
