On Wed, 24 May 2023 at 17:33, Matthias Bläsing <[email protected]> wrote: > Am Mittwoch, dem 24.05.2023 um 08:51 -0700 schrieb [email protected]: > > I'd proceed as is, document that on the release notes. If there would be > > many complaints, I might consider to do a 18u1 nbm release. > > oh nameless one, want to say who you are? But in general I agree.
Seconded. We've had an anonymous message like this before, so I'd be interested in who, and how? > > On 5/24/23 01:25, Neil C Smith wrote: > > Voting candidates should not need to be tested for functionality. > > This is in the voting instructions: > > [...] As well as checking any artefact functions correctly [...] > > Well, that was what I have been doing and yes I should have done it in > RC. Yes, sorry, badly worded comment. The last RC and release vote build are always off the same git hash. So we're just trying to encourage people to do the bulk of their usage testing, including prior testing of source builds, on the RCs. The key functionality check for artefacts in the vote is do they build, package or install the right thing, correctly, and give you something identical to the last RC except for the versions. Which is not to say we shouldn't pull a vote if a big enough issue is only noticed at that stage, and obviously we have before. I'm curious that no-one, not just you particularly, has picked up on and reported this one though? It's perhaps a gap in who is testing what during the RC phase of releases? Best wishes, Neil --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
