On 14/04/2010, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > All, > > After the experience of the recent 6.0.x releases, I wanted to try an > alternative approach and use explicit release candidates for 7.0.x. I'm > expecting to tweak the release process as we go. > > The first Tomcat 7 release candiate is ready for testing. 7.0.0-RC1 can > be obtained from: > http://people.apache.org/~markt/dev/tomcat-7/v7.0.0-RC1/ > The svn tag is: > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc7.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_7_0_0_RC1/ > > Please test this release candidate and provide feedback. > > Please run all of your tests against this candidate and report all > failures. I'd like to avoid the test, stop at first failure, new RC, > test, stop at first failure, new RC etc. cycle. > > And now for the important part: > > The 7.0.0-RC1 tag is > [ ] Broken - do not release > [ ] Alpha - go ahead and release 7.0.0 Stable based on 7.0.0-RC1 > [ ] Beta - go ahead and release 7.0.0 Beta based on 7.0.0-RC1 > [ ] Stable - go ahead and release 7.0.0 Stable based on 7.0.0-RC1 > > The following issues were noted: > - > >
There are a few licensing issues: Many of the java and xml files in tomcat-lite don't have AL headers. The following other files don't have AL headers: res/config.ini res/jvm.ini test/org/apache/coyote/http11/TestInternalInputBuffer.java test/org/apache/naming/resources/TestBaseDirContext.java The java files definitely need AL headers. I don't know the syntax of the .ini files, so it may be impossible to add comments, but if comments are possible, then the appropriate header should be added as these are not trivial files. 2 files in BCEL have IBM headers; these headers are presumably OK, but the NOTICE file probably needs to mention IBM. Not sure why the BCEL source archive does not do so in its NOTICE file. That might be an error. Otherwise the source archives and SVN tag look OK, and they agree with each other apart from .classpath and .project, which aren't needed in the archives. The binary archives generally look good, with N&L files and useful manifests. However, the Implementation-version headers include -RC1. Not sure that's correct; depends how the RC is promoted to GA. There is a minor problem with the bin/tomcat-juli.jar - the NOTICE says: Copyright 19...@year@ And for some odd reason there is an MD5 hash for it in the directory. The file could probably be removed. The bin/tomcat-native.tar.gz file includes a KEYS file which probably does not belong. My vote would be -1 because of the licensing issues. Not yet had a chance to test the binaries. > Thanks, > > Mark > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
