> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Gordon Sim <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 02/23/2010 10:36 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
> >>
> >> I've uploaded qpid-0.6rc6 and I think that we are ready for a vote
> >> immediately:
> >>
> >> Thanks to Rajith the files that were in violation of the 
> Apache rules 
> >> on licenses now have license texts.
> >>
> >> The only differences between rc6 and rc5 are non-functional, so if 
> >> you tested rc5 at all and you voted +1, you should have 
> every reason 
> >> to vote
> >> +1 again!
> >>
> >> Therefore I'd like to call for a vote to release this release 
> >> candidate
> >> (0.6rc6) "as is" relabelled as 0.6. In other words the 
> identical source
> >> bits as rc6 except changing the name.
> >>
> >> You should find qpid-0.6rc6 at: 
> >> http://qpid.apache.org/dist/qpid-0.6rc6
> >>
> >> The subversion revision is: 909632
> >> ( https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/qpid/branches/0.6-release/qpid )
> >>
> >> The rules for a release vote are:
> >> ( http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes )
> >>
> >> * Simple majority required.
> >> * No veto votes
> >> * At least 3 + votes.
> >>
> >> I propose that we consider all commiter votes not just 
> "binding" PMC 
> >> votes.
> >>
> >> I also propose to run the vote until Tue 2 Mar 2010. At 
> that point I 
> >> will total the votes.
> >>
> >> Please vote in a message replying to this one to make it easier to 
> >> find the votes.
> >>
> >> It goes without saying (well clearly not) that if you vote yes you 
> >> should have a reason to think that the release is good 
> enough - I'd 
> >> suggest downloading whatever you know most about and trying it.
> >
> > It looks fine to me (c++ tests and python tests against the 
> c++ broker 
> > run, python management tools run ok). Running RAT against it also 
> > looks ok except for ruby/ext/sasl/extconf.rb. That file is 
> tiny, but 
> > it is code and it doesn't have the license at the top.
> Oh dear, looks like I missed it.
> 
> > (There are some csproj files in the 0-10 dotnet client that 
> also don't 
> > have this, e.g. dotnet/client-010/client/Client.csproj, but 
> these may 
> > not be
> > required?)
> 
> If I add the license text to those csproj files, VC++ will 
> complain. I added it last time around and steve had to remove them.

I did???

It's a problem if the license text is first in the file; I remember
having to move it down after the first line (which has special
characters in it that Windows or MSVC use to detect the project
version).

-Steve


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]

Reply via email to