Hope everything was fixed now.
It may be non-binding, but
+1

Werner

On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 3:07 AM, Neil Griffin <[email protected]
> wrote:

> Dear Apache Portals Pluto Team and community,
>
> It took me a few weeks to find room in my schedule, but thanks to
> Woonsan's helpful advice I've staged another candidate for the new Apache
> Portals Pluto 3.0.1
> release.
>
> This release candidate includes:
>
> * Fully compliant Reference Implementation of the new Portlet 3.0
> Specification per JCR-362
>      https://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=362
> * Fully completed (and corrected) TCK (Test Compatibility Kit) for Portlet
> Spec 3.0
> * Updated portlet-api with associated Javadoc improvements
> * General bugfixes
> * Updated archetypes
>
> Please review the release candidate for this project which is found in the
> following maven staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheportals-1022/
>
> As Woonsan asked, the source and other artifacts have been made available
> at the /dist/dev directory:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/portals/pluto/
>
> (These files will be promoted to /dist/release if the vote passes)
>
> The Release Notes are available here:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
> ctId=10560&version=12338908
>
> The KEYS file to verify the release artifacts signature can be found here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/portals/pluto/KEYS
>
> Please review the release candidates and vote on releasing Apache Portals
> Pluto 3.0.1
>
> REMINDER: According to the following policy:
> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
>   "Before casting +1 binding votes, individuals are REQUIRED to download
> all
>    signed source code packages onto their own hardware, verify that they
> meet
>    all requirements of ASF policy on releases as described below, validate
> all
>    cryptographic signatures, compile as provided, and test the result on
> their
>    own platform."
>
> Seeing as how I am sending this on a Friday again, the normal vote of 72
> hours
> seems unreasonable. Therefore I would like to extend the vote to 96 hours.
>
> Please cast your vote:
>
> [ ] +1 for Release
> [ ]  0  for Don't care
> [ ] -1 Don't release (do provide a reason then)
>
>
> Best Regards to all,
>
> Neil
>

Reply via email to