On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Simon Laws <simonsl...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 7:48 AM, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 5:55 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Please review and vote on RC1 of the SCA 2.0-M5.1 release. >>>> >>>> This is a minor relese based on 2.0-M5 and provides fixes to running >>>> Tuscany applications in Google AppEngine environment and other minor >>>> fixes to remove compliance tests run from part of the source distro >>>> build. >>>> >>>> The distribution artifacts, RAT reports, and Maven staging repository >>>> are available for review at: >>>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende/tuscany/2.0-M5.1-RC1/ >>>> >>>> The release tag is at: >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/sca-java-2.x/tags/2.0-M5.1-RC1/ >>>> >>>> Here is my +1 >>>> >>> >>> Ping ? The M5.1 has a very small delta from M5 and should be a easy review. >>> >> >> I will try to get to this today, just have been too busy to spend time >> on it so far sorry. >> >> ...ant >> > Sorry Luciano. Only just got to this. Will take a look now. > > Simon > > -- > Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org > Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com >
- Rat looks OK - Build of source with clean repo initially failed with... Reason: POM 'org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-assembly-plugin' not found in reposi tory: Unable to download the artifact from any repository org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-assembly-plugin:pom:2.2-beta-3 But it worked this morning when I retried. - Key signatures look good - I tried some samples. The READMEs still leave a lot to be desired. This isn't any worse than M5 however. We know we have to make a better fist of this, hence the re-org in trunk. - The samples build against the staged maven artifacts - In the bin distro LICENCE file we refer to tuscany-assembly-xsd.jar and tuscany-sca-api.jar without explicit version numbers. This has always been the case but I wonder if we should. I also note that we refer to tuscany-assembly-xsd-osoa in the LICENSE which is not present any more. - There are some odd things in the src distro LICENSE file (they were like this in M5 but I for one didn't spot them). The module itest/databindings/common isn't in the src distro The module definitions-xml isn't in the src distro The last section which starts with... ================= The module assembly-xsd includes XSD files under the following license: The modules binding-ws-xml databinding databinding-axiom databinding-jaxb databinding-json databinding-sdo databinding-sdo-axiom databinding-xmlbeans interface-wsdl-xml Include the ipo.xsd and address.xsd information from the XML Schema Primer ================= It looks like the "The module assembly-xsd includes XSD files under the following license:" is just a cut and paste as this appears in front of the previous license. Some of the listed modules have been removed or merged with other modules. Some modules are missing. I believe the list should read. binding-ws databinding databinding-axiom databinding-jaxb databinding-jaxb-axiom databinding-json databinding-sdo databinding-sdo-axiom interface-wsdl I'd like to get the license files fixed before I vote to release. Regards Simon -- Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
