+1 for Release Tested: * builds from source * binary distribution runs * Verified CVE-2015-1926 is no longer an issue
-- David S Taylor 707 529-9194 [email protected] https://www.linkedin.com/in/davidseantaylor/ > On Jun 15, 2018, at 6:07 PM, 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?projectId=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
