There is one significant problem remaining and possibly another as well. - Need to update batik's pom to reference XGC 2.2 as opposed to 2.1. - I am concerned about the abbreviated version numbers, i.e., 2.2 instead of 2.2.0 (for fop and xgc), and 1.9 instead of 1.9.0 (for batik). The issue is that these version numbers during the dev process have been 2.2.0-SNAPSHOT and 1.9.0-SHAPSHOT. Normally, only the "-SNAPSHOT" qualifier is removed when publishing the final version, but you have deleted the final ".0" incremental version component as well, which may end up causing problems.
G. On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 4:29 AM, Simon Steiner <[email protected]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Hi, > > > > This is a vote to release XML Graphics Batik 1.9. Only source zip/tgz > modified to add pom.xml's since last vote. > > > > Artifacts can be found there: > > http://people.apache.org/~ssteiner/batik-1.9/ > > > > The release is signed with the key: > > https://people.apache.org/~ssteiner/KEYS > > > > The vote will end on 31/3/2017 > > > > +1 from me. > > > > Thanks > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: GnuPG v1 > > > > iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJY2OlHAAoJEFuT8d98223qbOYP/18nbZYLXflhswP2XQvOcmZn > > POvUhOgBiN+U8F6vbkqhHRvT+1KyMsnLSuvNdngCAnb0BDFlIl23TlU2VzIhDcQ1 > > UUJKHElAHoOUTdvU+VXtFEfA03asJ9tEULWuWmo48Of/POjEbbdjLVPGH0Sb4uUy > > 4XLt60dY0unL77E2StFikETIgTz7pgOIFCrRe7ESxtQrzvJMLUT+kIRzDwPZhjDi > > mm68+xo4yNRCaoZT7QTlGaYKECw+AVreqDxo4LGpkXa6jUkjObUP/XSWvVHeYA3j > > i/drPrk8rBinB1IRy/sbY6bHN/hp2NxGgU8J8XM0xA6a0mN5H5fWKi0W4TdTw98y > > TvsqO/ov7XGThZmvqPIikFApM6/hDEhJMClTSX03pZDG8CzFkybmcFweKwGdoGqM > > fh98m0tUvOi9VDYguqMUdyc6vHS/YxuKg6DxwHJSjnR9BpXY3CsvniVAW791wcR5 > > dMCMHEnYWVjSvEVOTKWhOFDPQNRW+G+2prHn2yxNHRHLNQ9M+0EwJ6WsYAD1v9Hw > > 4wlq6HvLAm5BOY6mPora+QHOPwE5v7lzYUcBlxtuy53LNPrX+JZ8wGmuQLOluHww > > Rx913jG7N0MxIKtwEFK4UftZ82x7ilB/6v6tapLLij+kyQjGb7QxFxd3aq26XzTE > > ZW9GnGw1jVhdaWAWFnF6 > > =dYHK > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >
