Henry - one thing is that, because the filenames are not included in the signatures, I could just alter the filenames now to not include -RCX... would that be preferable or would that necessitate another vote?
- Patrick On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 6:39 AM, Henry Saputra <[email protected]> wrote: > The RC should be just the directory where the artifact live but the final > name should omit the RCxx > > Hmm not sure if IPMCs will be picky about this but should not be blocker to > release. > > - Henry > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Patrick Wendell > <[email protected]<javascript:;>> > wrote: >> Hey Roman, >> >> We can do this in the future - I wasn't sure exactly what the right >> standard approach was. Just so I understand, the change you are >> proposing from what is there now is just to remove rcX from the >> file-names, correct? >> >> - Patrick >> >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:06 PM, Roman Shaposhnik >> <[email protected]<javascript:;>> > wrote: >>> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Patrick Wendell >>> <[email protected]<javascript:;>> > wrote: >>>> FYI this vote ends in 8 hours. >>> >>> I was going to test it on a fully distributed Bigtop cluster, but hit >>> a few snags. That now will extend into the weekend. >>> >>> Of course, that's not that big of a deal -- I can always vote on >>> incubator general once you guys move the vote over there. >>> >>> The only minor nit for the future I've noticed is that I would >>> highly encourage you to follow the usual RC practices where >>> you name all of your artifact as final bits and have a subdirectory >>> that reflects the RC name. E.g. here's how a very recent >>> Hadoop RC looks like: >>> http://people.apache.org/~acmurthy/hadoop-2.1.1-beta-rc0/ >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Roman.
