OK, I have removed the xref from both the bin and src archives. I have removed the javadoc from the src archives. I have also described the additional licenses in the LICENSE and NOTICE files.
The MANIFEST.MF file will stay in the SVN until the assembly plugin could accept manifestEntries (hopefully beta-3). For all the artifacts I produce the Manifest file with maven. I have no idea where the KEYS file is, and when I find it I will place my key there. If the archives seem OK, I will cast a vote on them. How do you find them? On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 5:17 AM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 01/04/2008, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 31/03/2008, Petar Tahchiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > OK, > > > > > > sorry for bringing this so long but this is my first time > > > I am making a release and as you see I am not so confident. > > > > > > I have uploaded the new archives here: > > > > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/dist/jakarta/cactus/1.8.0/ > > > > > > > Just noticed that both the source and binary archives contain the > apidocs and xref. > > It does not make sense to have them in both jars - no wonder the > source jar has doubled in size... > > Javadocs are more useful in the binary archive. > Xref can just go on the web-site - no need for it in either archive. > > > > > You'll need to add your key to the KEYS file. > > Also, it would be better if you included your ASF e-mail in the key > details. > > > > > > > with the following changes: > > > 0) Now everything is built with JDK 1.4 > > > 1) The L&N files are included. > > > > > > The LICENSE file needs to include or point to the 3rd party licenses. > > > > The NOTICE file needs to note that the product includes contributions > > from these 3rd party sources: > > > > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html > > and > > http://www.apache.org/licenses/example-NOTICE.txt > > > > [but note that the header in === should not be included!] > > > > > > > 2) The MANIFEST.MF is proper (according to me). > > > > > > There seem to be some manifest files in SVN, which do look fine. > > > > However, they contain the Java versions. > > These should be created by the build to reflect the actual settings > > used to create the jars. > > Any manifest files in SVN should be used as templates or boiler-plate > only. > > But it's probably easier to use Maven to create the entire file. > > > > > > > 3) I have removed the duplicate maven-release-plugin > > > declaration, which used to bring the line: > > > > > > <tagBase>file:////home/peter/tags/</tagBase> > > > > > > > > > I have made the archives from the trunk. > > > I have no RC tag. > > > > > > That's OK for a first look, but there should be a tag for the VOTE. > > But I suggest that you hold off creating a tag just in case there are > > some more issues. > > > > > > > If the archives are OK, I will cast a vote upon them > > > and if the vote succeeds I will copy the trunk in a tag. > > > > > > The only issue I see now is that we have the DEPENDENCIES file > > > in the META-INF, but since it is not a blocking issue I will leave > as it > > > is. (Actually I couldn't find anywhere in the web how to remove this > file). > > > > > > > > > Please can you have a look over the artifacts and in case there are > any > > > problems, > > > I will be glad to work on fixing them. > > > > > > Thanks a lot. > > > > > > P.S I have the following in my ~/.subversion/config file: > > > > > > *.java = svn:eol-style=native > > > > > > but I don't seem to set the eol-style correctly. Can you tell me > where am I > > > wrong? > > > > > > > > > You also need: > > > > [miscellany] > > enable-auto-props = yes > > > > > > > Also I have added the RAT plugin in the master pom so that we can > execute > > > the rat > > > plugin. I exclude the scratchpad/, descriptors/ and ANNOUNCEMENT.txtand > > I > > > don't > > > see any other file with a missing header.... > > > > > > > > > There are a lot of xml files with no header. > > Likewise some properties files, and html files. > > > > I can probably fix most of those. > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:49 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > On 30/03/2008, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On 29/03/2008, Petar Tahchiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Sebb, > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks for the feedback. > > > > > > > > > > > > I prefer to keep the bz2 archives. I have improved the > licenses > > > > according > > > > > > to the lib folder. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are still several jars in the lib directory which are not > > > > > mentioned in the licenses/README.txt. > > > > > > > > > > README.txt says: Apache ServletAPI - Apache 2.0 > > > > > > > > > > However, the MANIFEST in servlet-api-2.5.jar suggests that the > owner > > > > > is Sun, not Apache, and the license may not be AL 2.0. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also I have made the MANIFEST.MF to include the data you > pointed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the compiler versions are not in > > > > > cactus.core.framework.uberjar.javaEE.14-1.8.0.jar. > > > > > > > > > > Also, the version says source and target = 1.4, yet the code > was built > > > > > (and presumably tested) with Java 1.6. The code should be built > and > > > > > tested with Java 1.4. > > > > > > > > > > I just tried "mvn install" with Java 1.4, and a lot of tests > failed. > > > > > The ones I checked failed with: > > > > > > > > > > java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: > org/w3c/dom/ranges/DocumentRange > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also the META-INF folder to include the LICENSE and NOTICE > files. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, these files need to relate to the contents of the jar > or > > > > > archive - for example, the ones in the cactus jars should only > mention > > > > > Apache, as all the code therein is Apache, as far as I can > tell. > > > > > > > > > > The N & L files for the archives need to mention the external > software > > > > > that is included. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have also included the 'source' and 'target' versions in > the > > > > > > parent pom.xml and also the inceptionYear attribute. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The inceptionYear should agree with the first Copyright year. > > > > > > > > > > The pom includes the lines: > > > > > > > > > > <url>scp://[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > :/www/jakarta.apache.org/cactus/1.8.0/</url> > > > > > <tagBase>file:////home/peter/tags/</tagBase> > > > > > > > > > > which are unlikely to work for other users. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now I think that everything is OK. > > > > > > > > > > > > You can see the new files here: > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/dist/jakarta/cactus/1.8.0/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where is the RC tag for the source? > > > > > There should be an RC tag and a build that is made from the > tag. > > > > > If the vote succeeds, the tag can be copied to the release tag. > > > > > If not, then a new tag can be made once all the fixes have been > > > > > applied, and the process repeated. > > > > > > > > > > It looks like the final release tag has already been created. > > > > > If the vote fails, this will have to be deleted and recreated > once the > > > > > fixes have been made. > > > > > That's not ideal for release tags. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tomorrow morning I will cast a release-vote for these > archives. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, but I don't think they are ready. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just ran RAT on cactus-trunk - there are a lot of files that don't > > > > have the proper AL header. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, Petar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 3:43 AM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 29/03/2008, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 25/03/2008, Petar Tahchiev < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi everybody, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am following this tutorial: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://wiki.apache.org/HttpComponents/HttpComponentsCoreReleaseProcess > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and making it for Cactus. So I want to invite you > all to > > > > test the > > > > > > > archives I > > > > > > > > > have uploaded > > > > > > > > > here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/dist/jakarta/cactus/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and report problems if you find some. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not sure it's useful to include the bz2 archives; > although they > > > > are > > > > > > > > slightly smaller, the user-base is much smaller... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The licenses/README.txt file does not seem to agree > with the > > > > jars in > > > > > > > > the lib directory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, several of the jars in the lib directory are > quite old > > > > versions; > > > > > > > > if possible, they should be updated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The generated cactus jars must contain NOTICE and > LICENSE files > > > > (e.g. > > > > > > > > in the META-INF directory) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It would be useful if the cactus jar manifests included > the > > > > following > > > > > > > > attributes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Built-By: xxxxx > > > > > > > > Implementation-Title: Jakarta Cactus > > > > > > > > Implementation-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation > > > > > > > > Implementation-Vendor-Id: org.apache > > > > > > > > Implementation-Version: 1.8-SNAPSHOT > > > > > > > > Specification-Title: Jakarta Cactus > > > > > > > > Specification-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation > > > > > > > > Specification-Version: 1.8-SNAPSHOT > > > > > > > > Build-Jdk: 1.5.0_12 (e.g.) > > > > > > > > X-Compile-Source-JDK: 1.3 (e.g.) > > > > > > > > X-Compile-Target-JDK: 1.3 (e.g.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There seem to be some problems with SVN file > properties; I've > > > > fixed > > > > > > > > most of them in trunk. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you create the archives from trunk? > > > > > > > > There are some discrepancies between that and the > source > > > > archive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just noticed that the pom.xml does not specify the source > and > > > > target > > > > > > > java versions. > > > > > > > It should also have inceptionYear > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Might be an idea to use a property for the version so the > > > > individual > > > > > > > poms don't have to be updated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The eclipse .classpath file looks a bit odd - it seems to > have > > > > lots of > > > > > > > entries that don't seem to be required. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If no problems occur, I will continue with the next > steps of > > > > the > > > > > > > tutorial > > > > > > > > > and make > > > > > > > > > "official" release archives and cast a vote upon > them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. You can also have a look at the new Cactus > web-site I > > > > have > > > > > > > uploaded > > > > > > > > > here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://jakarta.apache.org/cactus/1.8.0/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am currently doing final test upon it and then I > will > > > > upload it as > > > > > > > > > "official" Cactus site. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Regards, Petar! > > > > > > > > > Karlovo, Bulgaria. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > EOOXML objections > > > > > > > > > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Public PGP Key at: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 > > > > > > > > > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 > B53B > > > > 7615 00F9 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, Petar! > > > > > > Karlovo, Bulgaria. > > > > > > > > > > > > EOOXML objections > > > > > > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections > > > > > > > > > > > > Public PGP Key at: > > > > > > > > > > > http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 > > > > > > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B > 7615 00F9 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Regards, Petar! > > > Karlovo, Bulgaria. > > > > > > EOOXML objections > > > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections > > > > > > Public PGP Key at: > > > > http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 > > > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9 > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Regards, Petar! Karlovo, Bulgaria. EOOXML objections http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections Public PGP Key at: http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9
