Fred, could you please discuss this in a separate thread? It's not unique to this vote. If you think something could be improved in the voting process, update the guidelines or similar. Baptiste has followed the current guidelines.
/Anders On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Fred Cooke <[email protected]> wrote: > Because there are now three distinct 1.0-alpha-4 variants out there, I'd > like you to explicitly tell me which one is "take 3", by giving us the > md5/sha1 for each artifact of variety "take 3". IE, if I just get one from > a repo somewhere, it could be cached/old/take2/take1/take0?/etc, and > although the files will match, I won't know which set it is because there's > nothing to distinguish it by. > > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Baptiste MATHUS <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hi, >> Could you please give more precisions about the issue you're having with >> MD5/SHA1? Which artifacts have wrong hashes from your tests? It would help. >> I just verified the extra-enforcer-rules >> jar<https://nexus.codehaus.org/content/repositories/orgcodehausmojo-036/org/codehaus/mojo/extra-enforcer-rules/1.0-alpha-4/extra-enforcer-rules-1.0-alpha-4.jar> >> and >> its md5 >> <https://nexus.codehaus.org/content/repositories/orgcodehausmojo-036/org/codehaus/mojo/extra-enforcer-rules/1.0-alpha-4/extra-enforcer-rules-1.0-alpha-4.jar.md5>and >> it seems correct. Same for sources. >> >> Btw, maybe it's already there, but I agree we shouldn't be able to push >> artifacts with incorrect hashes. I guess/hope there's a staging ruleset for >> this. >> >> Thanks >> >> >> 2013/3/18 Fred Cooke <[email protected]> >> >>> How about some basics: >>> >>> MD5 and SHA1 of each artifact involved. >>> >>> Codehaus kingpins, how about making this a requirement if something >>> doesn't go through on the first cut? >>> >>> It's just unprofessional to not do this, and not change the version, at >>> the same time. >>> >>> Fred. >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:13 PM, Baptiste Mathus <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I'd like to release version *1.0-alpha-4* of the >>>> *extra-enforcer-rules*project. >>>> Note that this is the third try. So, please don't forget to delete your >>>> local version if you already tried the previous release attempt. >>>> >>>> Extra Enforcer Rules is a project containing extra rules for Apache >>>> Maven's Enforcer Plugin. >>>> >>>> We solved 7 issues: >>>> >>>> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11062&version=18450 >>>> >>>> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: >>>> >>>> https://jira.codehaus.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MOJO%20AND%20component%20%3D%20extra-enforcer-rules%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20due%20ASC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC >>>> >>>> Staging Repositories: >>>> General: https://nexus.codehaus.org/content/groups/staging/ >>>> Exclusive: >>>> https://nexus.codehaus.org/content/repositories/orgcodehausmojo-036/ >>>> >>>> (Staging) Site: >>>> http://mojo.codehaus.org/extra-enforcer-rules/ >>>> >>>> SCM Tag: >>>> https://svn.codehaus.org/mojo/tags/extra-enforcer-rules-1.0-alpha-4/ >>>> >>>> Note that this version includes two new rules: >>>> >>>> - enforcerBytecodeVersion : rule to check that bytecode of >>>> dependencies is not higher than expected >>>> - banCircularDependencies : rule to prevent having circular >>>> dependencies >>>> >>>> >>>> [ ] +1 >>>> [ ] +0 >>>> [ ] -1 >>>> >>>> The vote is open for 72 hours and will succeed by lazy consensus. >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Baptiste >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS - http://batmat.net >> Sauvez un arbre, >> Mangez un castor ! >> > >
