Thanks for everybody's input. The release vote passes with three +1's and
no -1's.
The votes were from:
Ted +1
Jan +1
John +1
Note that sebb also has a +1 on this thread but it is about improving the
documentation, not the Drill release artifacts.
Thanks to everyone. We'll move forward with pr
On 9 September 2014 13:24, jan i wrote:
> On 9 September 2014 06:51, Ted Dunning wrote:
>
>> John,
>>
>> Actually, on reading the links you provide, neither provides solid guidance
>> about the issue in question. The second link comes closest where it says
>> that projects typically use one of t
On 9 September 2014 06:51, Ted Dunning wrote:
> John,
>
> Actually, on reading the links you provide, neither provides solid guidance
> about the issue in question. The second link comes closest where it says
> that projects typically use one of three different methods. How does this
> document
John,
Actually, on reading the links you provide, neither provides solid guidance
about the issue in question. The second link comes closest where it says
that projects typically use one of three different methods. How does this
document your strong preference for a single one of these alternati
Well, I was trying to gently ask if there was some way to break the impasse
between different versions of the documentation.
Obviously you saw one thing and Jacques saw another. But you said what he
saw was out of date. How could he tell that? Have you rectified the
competing versions of docume
Ted,
Do you mean more than here:
[1]: http://www.apache.org/dev/publishing-maven-artifacts.html
[2]: http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#host-rc
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> Is the new process documented somewhere?
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 3:17 PM, sebb wrot
Is the new process documented somewhere?
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 3:17 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 7 September 2014 20:31, Jacques Nadeau wrote:
> > As I understand the release guidelines, one is not allowed to put
> something
> > on dist.apache.org until after a release vote by the Incubator PMC
> a
On 7 September 2014 20:31, Jacques Nadeau wrote:
> As I understand the release guidelines, one is not allowed to put something
> on dist.apache.org until after a release vote by the Incubator PMC approves
> that release:
>
> "Only formally-approved releases may be distributed from the main
> direc
Hey John,
Thanks for the vote and the information. I didn't even realize that the
dist.a.o/dev folder existed at until I read your reference at [1]. Always
new things to learn. I guess that is another option as opposed to the old
skool people.a.o.
[1]: http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#ho
On 7 September 2014 21:48, John D. Ament wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 3:39 PM, jan i wrote:
>
> > On 7 September 2014 21:31, Jacques Nadeau wrote:
> >
> > > As I understand the release guidelines, one is not allowed to put
> > something
> > > on dist.apache.org until after a release vote by
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 3:39 PM, jan i wrote:
> On 7 September 2014 21:31, Jacques Nadeau wrote:
>
> > As I understand the release guidelines, one is not allowed to put
> something
> > on dist.apache.org until after a release vote by the Incubator PMC
> > approves
> > that release:
> >
> > "Only
On 7 September 2014 21:31, Jacques Nadeau wrote:
> As I understand the release guidelines, one is not allowed to put something
> on dist.apache.org until after a release vote by the Incubator PMC
> approves
> that release:
>
> "Only formally-approved releases may be distributed from the main
> di
As I understand the release guidelines, one is not allowed to put something
on dist.apache.org until after a release vote by the Incubator PMC approves
that release:
"Only formally-approved releases may be distributed from the main
directories" [1]
For this candidate, as with our last two release
Sorry, I have to vote -1
The release is not staged in the proper place (e.g.
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ )
If this gets moved, I can vote +1
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Jacques Nadeau wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Thanks for the feedback. I'd like to respond to each of your
+1 (binding)
Others have checked signatures and conducted functional tests (and noted
tiny discrepancies on the web-site build instructions). I have used this
software from the master branch quite recently. As such, I focussed on
non-functional aspects of the distro.
This looks like a very clea
Hi John,
Thanks for the feedback. I'd like to respond to each of your concerns:
>>Your NOTICE file is missing MIT license.
The notice file states: "Please see LICENSE for additional copyright and
licensing information." The LICENSE file contains the MIT license.
>>Your source file includes bi
Hi,
Your NOTICE file is missing MIT license.
Your source file includes binaries in the sample-data directory.
Ideally, your directory name should match the release version (0.5.0.rc2 vs
0.5.0)
John
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Jacques Nadeau wrote:
> It is my pleasure to present the Apach
It is my pleasure to present the Apache Drill 0.5.0-incubating release to
the general incubator list for a vote. This set of artifacts have passed
our drill-dev vote and incorporate a number of improvements with over 100
JIRAs closed in the last month.
As part of this release, we looked to addres
18 matches
Mail list logo
