+1 I generated and checked the RAT report, and it didn't seem to contain any wrong licenses.
There are a lot of IDE files in the distro, and a lot of .gitignore files. You might want to remove those, or at least consolidate the .gitignore files. Martijn On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Michael Fitzner <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Scott,We have seen the issues from Thomas. After the 1.2 release we > will work on the issues and try to fix those up to the next bug fixing > release. > @Martijn I think for publishing the release we still need a vote from > one of our mentors. It would be great if you could still have a look > to it. > ThanksMichael > 2011/12/16 Scott Comer <[email protected]>: >> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
