-1
I'm all for releasing ADS 1.1.0 real soon now and have no problems
with the code but...
This doesn't say what we're voting on. While I prefer voting on
actual artifacts that I can check I'm ok with voting on a specific
svn revision of a particular code base as long as its clearly
specified together with the expected build method. This vote looks
to me like a referendum on "should we tag something and vote on the
tag" rather than a vote on something specific.
So, I'll guess randomly :-) that this is intended to be a vote on
directory/studio/trunk rev 641069.
First, and this is a blocker, there are no hardcoded LICENSE and
NOTICE files in svn at the checkout root. I'm happy to help with
constructing appropriate files but since I don't know anything about
studio I can't really do it myself. If all the files in svn under
the checkout root is asf licensed with no other restrictions (such as
from being copied from somewhere else) then the AL goes in the
LICENSE and the NOTICE file is the minimal:
----------
Apache Directory Studio
Copyright xxx-2008 The Apache Software Foundation
This product includes software developed by
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
----------
If there is code from other sources please let me know what it is and
I'll try to help figure out what we need to do. I don't know the
Studio inception year... this needs to replace the xxx. Neither this
LICENSE nor NOTICE file needs to reflect any dependencies of the
project, just the stuff that is actually in svn.
Since this doesn't specify an expected build method I have to assume
it uses the only one I know about... maven. In this case this is not
suitable for release since it has a snapshot parent pom:
<parent>
<groupId>org.apache.directory.project</groupId>
<artifactId>project</artifactId>
<version>10-SNAPSHOT</version>
</parent>
I'm also slightly worried about the SNAPSHOT versions in the
properties in http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/directory/studio/trunk/
pom.xml?view=markup. They might get changed to something that aren't
snapshots during the actual release process but I have no way to know
that.
It's also extremely desirable to lock down all the maven plugins with
explicit versions.
Another thing I'm concerned about from a few days ago is that the
maven build produces some kind of update site thingy that doesn't
include legal files. I disabled the check for legal files for it.
If this is something that might get into a maven repo this needs to
be fixed.
sorry...
thanks
david jencks
On Mar 27, 2008, at 12:26 AM, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
Hi,
it is now more then 6 month since we released Apache Directory Studio
1.0.1. I think it is high time to push a new 1.1.0 release.
We had two RC releases and got some feedback and bug reports from
users.
So I think it is stable enough for the GA release.
We fixed 63 bugs and implemented 36 new features or improvements. Here
you could find the release notes:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
projectId=12310590&styleName=Html&version=12312701
Let's vote on the release:
[ ] +1 Release Apache Directory Studio 1.1.0
[ ] +/-0 Abstain
[ ] -1 Do NOT release Apache Directory Studio 1.1.0
Kind Regards,
Stefan Seelmann
