I haven't tried the unix distro yet, but don't expect any issue. Thomas had 
posted a number of bugs, some critical,  with fixes i wish could be included, 
but would rather see a release out.

We're now using c binding successfully  in two projects.

+1 on release

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 16, 2011, at 7:40 AM, Martin Veith <[email protected]> wrote:

>> I call out the build issue because in my experience the build issue is a big 
>> mental hurdle to getting started. 
> I fully agree with you. 
> 
>> Everything should be spelled out in the readme / ant file there in the 
>> example directory. Lovely as it is, wiki is far away.
> At the moment the dist-Readme.txt in each example folder of the source bundle 
> (which corresponds to the Readme.txt of the binary packages) contains the 
> information about the required .NET 4.0 Framework and the description how to 
> build the C example using CMake.
> What in your opinion is still missing?
> 
>> I did figure out the .net 4.0 part.
>> 
>> Two lines in the read me, one for ant cmake and one for the .net on my path 
>> would have saved a lot of grief
> So is everything now working on your machine? Is there something we should 
> improve or fix for this release or is it ok for you to publish it as it is?
> 
> Thanks
> Martin
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Comer [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Freitag, 16. Dezember 2011 13:17
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: AW: [VOTE] Apache Etch 1.2 release packages
> 
> I call out the build issue because in my experience the build issue is a big 
> mental hurdle to getting started. Everything should be spelled out in the 
> readme / ant file there in the example directory. Lovely as it is, wiki is 
> far away.
> 
> I did figure out the .net 4.0 part.
> 
> Two lines in the read me, one for ant cmake and one for the .net on my path 
> would have saved a lot of grief
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Dec 16, 2011, at 3:22 AM, Martin Veith <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Scott,
>> 
>> thanks for your reply.
>> 
>>> in the past the sha was a sha1. now is a sha512. perhaps that should 
>>> be called out?
>>> perhaps a README.txt in the artifacts directory telling folks how to 
>>> validate?
>> According to http://apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#sha-checksum the use 
>> of SHA-1 should be avoided. 
>> Therefore we used SHA512. We will add this note to the download page of the 
>> website as soon as the release is out. 
>> Information and examples hot to verify the release signatures and check sums 
>> can be found on the website too.
>> 
>>> the ant build of example\helloworld works.
>>> the java version of example\helloworld works.
>>> the c# version of example\helloworld doesn't work. obscure .net error 
>>> code.
>> Since the integration of the UDP Transport layer the C# build has had 
>> dependencies to the .NET 4.0 framework. 
>> In order to build the examples the location of the framework must be in your 
>> path.
>> This information is also available in the Readme file of each example.
>> Maybe that's the reason of your obscure error?
>> 
>> As this dependency to .NET 4.0 is caused only by a used implementation of a 
>> BlockingQueue we are thinking about to eliminate this for the next release 
>> and so come back to .NET 2.0 compatibility.
>> 
>>> there is no c version of example\helloworld. i'm thinking there should 
>>> be.
>> As in the previous 1.1.0-release C examples are only available for 
>> example_mixin and helloworld. 
>> The C examples are not build by the ant build script in the binary releases 
>> because we don't ship the ant-cmake library. 
>> Therefore you have to call cmake manually as described in the Readme file 
>> too.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Martin
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: scott comer [mailto:[email protected]] 
>> Sent: Donnerstag, 15. Dezember 2011 22:05
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: AW: [VOTE] Apache Etch 1.2 release packages
>> 
>> because of the no c version of examples, i vote:
>> 
>> -1
>> 
>> scott
>> 
>> On 12/15/2011 2:52 PM, scott comer wrote:
>>> trying on windows 7 with java 1.6.0_29 and ant 1.7.1:
>>> 
>>> in the past the sha was a sha1. now is a sha512. perhaps that should 
>>> be called out?
>>> 
>>> perhaps a README.txt in the artifacts directory telling folks how to 
>>> validate?
>>> 
>>> installation verified.
>>> 
>>> the ant build of example\helloworld works.
>>> the java version of example\helloworld works.
>>> the c# version of example\helloworld doesn't work. obscure .net error 
>>> code.
>>> 
>>> there is no c version of example\helloworld. i'm thinking there should 
>>> be.
>>> 
>>> scott out
>>> 
>>> On 12/15/2011 7:54 AM, Michael Fitzner wrote:
>>>> I checked also the release package for Windows 7. It looks good so far.
>>>> 
>>>> so +1 from my side
>>>> 
>>>> What is with all the other PPMC and Committers? Could you please 
>>>> review it!
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Michael
>>>> 
>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>> Von: Martin Veith [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. Dezember 2011 09:49
>>>> An:[email protected]
>>>> Betreff: RE: [VOTE] Apache Etch 1.2 release packages
>>>> 
>>>> +1 from me
>>>> SHA512 and MD5 checksums look good, signatures are valid.
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Martin
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Michael Fitzner [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>> Sent: Montag, 12. Dezember 2011 18:18
>>>> To:[email protected]
>>>> Subject: [VOTE] Apache Etch 1.2 release packages
>>>> 
>>>> Hello,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> We created all the release artifacts for the upcoming 1.2 release of 
>>>> Apache Etch.
>>>> 
>>>> All files are currently placed in the following directory at
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> https://people.apache.org/~fitzner/apache-etch-1.2.0-incubating-rc1/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Instructions for building the source packages can be found in the 
>>>> README.txt and
>>>> 
>>>> BUILD.txt files.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Please vote for this release package:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> [ ] +1 Accept; release looks good
>>>> 
>>>> [ ] +0 Don't care
>>>> 
>>>> [ ] -1  Don't accept the release because of...
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> This vote will run for 72 hours.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for your votes,
>>>> 
>>>> Michael
>>>> 
>>>> Martin
>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Reply via email to