[ x ] +1 Approve the release
Building passing fine with `mvn clean test install -Pdev` on:
Apache Maven 3.5.4 (1edded0938998edf8bf061f1ceb3cfdeccf443fe;
2018-06-18T06:33:14+12:00)
Maven home: /opt/apache-maven-3.5.4
Java version: 1.8.0_191, vendor: Oracle Corporation, runtime:
/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/jre
Default locale: en_NZ, platform encoding: UTF-8
OS name: "linux", version: "4.15.0-43-generic", arch: "amd64", family: "unix"
Also had a look at the archives in the dist area, everything looking good.
+ does everything work on Linux?
Yes
+ are the GPG signatures fine?
+ are the checksums correct?
Both above look OK. Key matching 04C95136D236A58F, no issues found with
checksums.
+ is there a source archive?
Yes, and contents look OK.
+ can the source archive really be built?
(NB This requires a "mvn install" first time)
Yes, mvn clean install -Pdev worked fine, producing a 3.10.0 release.
+ is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact
(both source and binary artifacts)?
Looked at a few artefacts and everything seemed OK.
+ does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions?
Looks OK.
+ have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades?
if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately?
Don't think so. All good IMO.
+ does the tag/commit in the SCM contain reproducible sources?
Yes, built from SCM tag initially.
Thanks for RM'ing
Bruno
________________________________
From: Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org>
To: "dev@jena.apache.org" <dev@jena.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, 31 December 2018 6:31 AM
Subject: [VOTE] Apache Jena 3.10.0 RC1
Hi,
Here is a vote on a release of Jena 3.10.0.
This is the first proposed release candidate.
The deadline for the vote is Wednesday, 2 January 2019, at 21:00 UTC
==== Release changes:
44 JIRA:
https://s.apache.org/jena-3.10.0-jira
== Retirements
Old modules retired and not in this release:
jena-fuseki1
jena-csv
See
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/edd5876b070f24091e19b5c1dd274ef46c74a0f920d419a29a59f66b@%3Cusers.jena.apache.org%3E
== Changes of note:
The project intends to replace jena-spatial in a future release with
Greg's GeoSPARQL:
https://github.com/galbiston/geosparql-jena
JENA-1621 : Lucene upgrade to 7.4
May need to reload Lucene indexes.
(e.g. the Lucene index was create originally with Lucene v5.x (prior
Jena 3.3.0). See Lucene upgrade tool.
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/7_4/indexupgrader-tool.html
JENA-1623 : Fuseki security - user authentication and access control.
JENA-1627 : HTTPs support
http://jena.staging.apache.org/documentation/fuseki2/data-access-control
== Updates
Only plugins. JENA-1624
surefire : 2.21.0 -> 2.22.1 (+ SUREFIRE-1588)
compiler : 3.7.0 -> 3.8.0
shade : 3.1.0 -> 3.2.0
==== Release Vote
Everyone, not just committers, is invited to test and vote.
Please download and test the proposed release.
Staging repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejena-1028
Proposed dist/ area:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jena/
Keys:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS
Git commit (browser URL):
https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/ab482e34
Git Commit Hash:
ab482e34584350af717db1a8d698aa3949e51871
Git Commit Tag:
jena-3.10.0
Please vote to approve this release:
[ ] +1 Approve the release
[ ] 0 Don't care
[ ] -1 Don't release, because ...
This vote will be open to at least
Wednesday, 2 January 2019, at 20:00 UTC
If you expect to check the release but the time limit does not work
for you, please email within the schedule above with an expected time
and we can extend the vote period.
Thanks,
Andy
Checking needed:
+ does everything work on Linux?
+ does everything work on MS Windows?
+ does everything work on OS X?
+ are the GPG signatures fine?
+ are the checksums correct?
+ is there a source archive?
+ can the source archive really be built?
(NB This requires a "mvn install" first time)
+ is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact
(both source and binary artifacts)?
+ does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions?
+ have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades?
if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately?
+ does the tag/commit in the SCM contain reproducible sources?
