Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] Towards release 0.4.5a56
I understand. Jira cases have been created and the general@ thread has been made as well. On 2022/12/23 00:12:17 Julian Hyde wrote: > Yes. I didn’t want to use the word “issue” twice in one sentence. > > Julian > > > On Dec 22, 2022, at 15:51, Riley Kuttruff wrote: > > > > Thanks Julian, I'll try to get the thread started by EOD. > > > > Can I ask what you mean by logging cases? Is that like creating issues on > > Jira? > > > > Thanks, > > Riley > > > >> On 2022/12/22 23:37:44 Julian Hyde wrote: > >> PS Don’t make a new RC. The IPMC will vote on the exact same artifacts. > >> > >> Julian > >> > On Dec 22, 2022, at 15:20, Julian Hyde wrote: > >>> > >>> Next step is to carry out a vote on the gene...@incubator.apache.org > >>> list. > >>> > >>> This may seem like unnecessary bureaucracy; for which I apologize. The > >>> reason is that only a PMC (in this case the Incubator PMC, IPMC) may > >>> release code on behalf of the ASF. > >>> > >>> Practically speaking, the release will receive due diligence by experts > >>> in the IPMC. It’s likely that they will find problems, and if so, we may > >>> need another RC, and two votes, to resolve them. Please be patient, > >>> because this is the learning process. > >>> > >>> Riley, Glad to see that you have sent a RESULT email already. Please > >>> start a vote thread on general@, referencing the thread on dev@. Good > >>> luck! > >>> > >>> Can you also log cases for the issues I noted during the vote. The IPMC > >>> tends to be lenient for the first release, especially if the podling is > >>> learning and improving. > >>> > >>> Julian > >>> > On Dec 22, 2022, at 11:44, Riley Kuttruff wrote: > > So the vote for rc2 passed. What are our next steps? Do I push the > .tar.gz and .asc files to > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/incubator/sdap ? > > >> On 2022/12/14 20:04:29 Riley Kuttruff wrote: > > I verified, built and tested the release tarballs in the same manner I > > did before and it passed just the same. > > > > I believe it's compliant with ASF policy but I'm not 100% sure so I'm > > holding off on the vote. > > - We added DISCLAIMER & README files to all release tarballs > > - I went through and checked MOST of the files for the ASF license > > headers and added them where needed though I may have missed something > > > >> On 2022/12/13 19:36:26 Nga Chung wrote: > >> HI all, > >> > >> I started a VOTE thread for 1.0.0rc2, but can someone else please > >> volunteer > >> to take over as release manager because I will be away 12/16/22 - > >> 1/16/23. > >> > >> I captured initial release instructions here > >> https://github.com/ngachung/incubator-sdap-nexus/blob/SDAP-414/docs/release.rst > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Nga > >> > >> > >>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:07 AM Julian Hyde wrote: > >> > >>> By the way, I wouldn't create a new RC for the vote. Just vote on the > >>> RC1 you already have. We know we'll need to iterate through a few RCs > >>> before we get a good one. > >>> > >>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:05 AM Julian Hyde wrote: > > Hey, that looks pretty good! In fact it looks a lot like an Apache > >>> release. > > A few things: > > 1. I saw you added dist/dev/incubator/sdap/KEYS; can you move that > file so that its path is dist/release/incubator/sdap/KEYS. Its main > purpose will be for people who download the release after it has been > released and want to verify the signatures. Putting it in 'release' > will ensure that it is automatically mirrored to > https://downloads.apache.org > > 2. I got the following output from gpg: > > gpg: Signature made Mon 05 Dec 2022 10:52:22 PM PST > gpg:using RSA key > >>> 1392A8A11801359247A803D8D2449E0EB5EF1E73 > gpg: Good signature from "Nga Chung (CODE SIGNING KEY) > " [unknown] > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to > the > >>> owner. > > This means that the artifacts are signed correctly, but you are not > in > my web of trust. Soon after the release, we should have a key-signing > party (or you should get your key signed by a colleague who has a > well-connected key). > > 3. At first glance, the contents of the .tar.gz files look pretty > good. I haven't checked the headers etc. yet. There seems to be a > LICENSE.txt and NOTICE in each, which is good. You should also add a > DISCLAIMER and/or DISCLAIMER-WIP file (required by the incubation > process [1]). I also recommend
[jira] [Updated] (SDAP-420) 1.0.0 Release: Add missing DISCLAIMER files to release repositories
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-420?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Riley Kuttruff updated SDAP-420: Resolution: Done Status: Done (was: To Do) > 1.0.0 Release: Add missing DISCLAIMER files to release repositories > --- > > Key: SDAP-420 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-420 > Project: Apache Science Data Analytics Platform > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Riley Kuttruff >Priority: Critical > -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Updated] (SDAP-421) 1.0.0 Release: Add README files to release repositories
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-421?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Riley Kuttruff updated SDAP-421: Resolution: Done Status: Done (was: To Do) > 1.0.0 Release: Add README files to release repositories > --- > > Key: SDAP-421 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-421 > Project: Apache Science Data Analytics Platform > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Riley Kuttruff >Priority: Minor > -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Created] (SDAP-421) 1.0.0 Release: Add README files to release repositories
Riley Kuttruff created SDAP-421: --- Summary: 1.0.0 Release: Add README files to release repositories Key: SDAP-421 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-421 Project: Apache Science Data Analytics Platform Issue Type: Task Reporter: Riley Kuttruff -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Created] (SDAP-420) 1.0.0 Release: Add missing DISCLAIMER files to release repositories
Riley Kuttruff created SDAP-420: --- Summary: 1.0.0 Release: Add missing DISCLAIMER files to release repositories Key: SDAP-420 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-420 Project: Apache Science Data Analytics Platform Issue Type: Task Reporter: Riley Kuttruff -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Created] (SDAP-419) 1.0.0 Release: Add missing NOTICE files to release repositories
Riley Kuttruff created SDAP-419: --- Summary: 1.0.0 Release: Add missing NOTICE files to release repositories Key: SDAP-419 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-419 Project: Apache Science Data Analytics Platform Issue Type: Task Reporter: Riley Kuttruff -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Updated] (SDAP-418) 1.0.0 Release: Ensure source files contain required ASF headers
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-418?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Riley Kuttruff updated SDAP-418: Resolution: Done Status: Done (was: To Do) > 1.0.0 Release: Ensure source files contain required ASF headers > --- > > Key: SDAP-418 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-418 > Project: Apache Science Data Analytics Platform > Issue Type: Task > Components: collection-ingester, config-operator, granule-ingester, > nexus >Reporter: Riley Kuttruff >Priority: Critical > -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Updated] (SDAP-419) 1.0.0 Release: Add missing NOTICE files to release repositories
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-419?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Riley Kuttruff updated SDAP-419: Resolution: Done Status: Done (was: To Do) > 1.0.0 Release: Add missing NOTICE files to release repositories > --- > > Key: SDAP-419 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-419 > Project: Apache Science Data Analytics Platform > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Riley Kuttruff >Priority: Critical > -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Created] (SDAP-418) 1.0.0 Release: Ensure source files contain required ASF headers
Riley Kuttruff created SDAP-418: --- Summary: 1.0.0 Release: Ensure source files contain required ASF headers Key: SDAP-418 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SDAP-418 Project: Apache Science Data Analytics Platform Issue Type: Task Components: collection-ingester, config-operator, granule-ingester, nexus Reporter: Riley Kuttruff -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] Towards release 0.4.5a56
Yes. I didn’t want to use the word “issue” twice in one sentence. Julian > On Dec 22, 2022, at 15:51, Riley Kuttruff wrote: > > Thanks Julian, I'll try to get the thread started by EOD. > > Can I ask what you mean by logging cases? Is that like creating issues on > Jira? > > Thanks, > Riley > >> On 2022/12/22 23:37:44 Julian Hyde wrote: >> PS Don’t make a new RC. The IPMC will vote on the exact same artifacts. >> >> Julian >> On Dec 22, 2022, at 15:20, Julian Hyde wrote: >>> >>> Next step is to carry out a vote on the gene...@incubator.apache.org list. >>> >>> This may seem like unnecessary bureaucracy; for which I apologize. The >>> reason is that only a PMC (in this case the Incubator PMC, IPMC) may >>> release code on behalf of the ASF. >>> >>> Practically speaking, the release will receive due diligence by experts in >>> the IPMC. It’s likely that they will find problems, and if so, we may need >>> another RC, and two votes, to resolve them. Please be patient, because this >>> is the learning process. >>> >>> Riley, Glad to see that you have sent a RESULT email already. Please start >>> a vote thread on general@, referencing the thread on dev@. Good luck! >>> >>> Can you also log cases for the issues I noted during the vote. The IPMC >>> tends to be lenient for the first release, especially if the podling is >>> learning and improving. >>> >>> Julian >>> On Dec 22, 2022, at 11:44, Riley Kuttruff wrote: So the vote for rc2 passed. What are our next steps? Do I push the .tar.gz and .asc files to https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/incubator/sdap ? >> On 2022/12/14 20:04:29 Riley Kuttruff wrote: > I verified, built and tested the release tarballs in the same manner I > did before and it passed just the same. > > I believe it's compliant with ASF policy but I'm not 100% sure so I'm > holding off on the vote. > - We added DISCLAIMER & README files to all release tarballs > - I went through and checked MOST of the files for the ASF license > headers and added them where needed though I may have missed something > >> On 2022/12/13 19:36:26 Nga Chung wrote: >> HI all, >> >> I started a VOTE thread for 1.0.0rc2, but can someone else please >> volunteer >> to take over as release manager because I will be away 12/16/22 - >> 1/16/23. >> >> I captured initial release instructions here >> https://github.com/ngachung/incubator-sdap-nexus/blob/SDAP-414/docs/release.rst >> >> Thanks, >> Nga >> >> >>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:07 AM Julian Hyde wrote: >> >>> By the way, I wouldn't create a new RC for the vote. Just vote on the >>> RC1 you already have. We know we'll need to iterate through a few RCs >>> before we get a good one. >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:05 AM Julian Hyde wrote: Hey, that looks pretty good! In fact it looks a lot like an Apache >>> release. A few things: 1. I saw you added dist/dev/incubator/sdap/KEYS; can you move that file so that its path is dist/release/incubator/sdap/KEYS. Its main purpose will be for people who download the release after it has been released and want to verify the signatures. Putting it in 'release' will ensure that it is automatically mirrored to https://downloads.apache.org 2. I got the following output from gpg: gpg: Signature made Mon 05 Dec 2022 10:52:22 PM PST gpg:using RSA key >>> 1392A8A11801359247A803D8D2449E0EB5EF1E73 gpg: Good signature from "Nga Chung (CODE SIGNING KEY) " [unknown] gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the >>> owner. This means that the artifacts are signed correctly, but you are not in my web of trust. Soon after the release, we should have a key-signing party (or you should get your key signed by a colleague who has a well-connected key). 3. At first glance, the contents of the .tar.gz files look pretty good. I haven't checked the headers etc. yet. There seems to be a LICENSE.txt and NOTICE in each, which is good. You should also add a DISCLAIMER and/or DISCLAIMER-WIP file (required by the incubation process [1]). I also recommend adding a top-level README in each .tar.gz that describes the purpose of the file, and how to build it (for example see Calcite's README [2]) A good next step would be to start a vote. Craft an email with the same general structure as Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc2 [3] and send it to dev@. Then PPMC members should vote on the release, each
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SDAP (incubating) 1.0.0-rc2
They are implicitly binding iff the voter is a PPMC member. Saying “(binding)” is just a courtesy to the RM. When announcing the result the RM should distinguish binding from non- binding votes. Non-binding votes don’t “count” but can alert the PPMC to problems and so are worth taking seriously. Julian > On Dec 22, 2022, at 10:15, Riley Kuttruff wrote: > > Julian, > > Are PPMC votes implicitly binding or does it need to be explicitly stated? > > Riley > >> On 2022/12/22 17:27:09 Julian Hyde wrote: >> Thomas, (and others on this thread), it is helpful if you provide rationale >> for your vote. What steps did you take to verify the release? Did you >> encounter any matters of concern? >> >> Julian >> On Dec 21, 2022, at 3:05 PM, Thomas G Loubrieu wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> On 2022/12/20 16:12:07 Julian Hyde wrote: If NASA has contributed these files to SDAP we’re fine. Julian >> On Dec 19, 2022, at 5:51 PM, Stepheny Perez wrote: > > Hi Julian, > > Those are test files, some are custom but some aren’t. For example > 2018123109-JPL-L4_GHRSST-SSTfnd-MUR25-GLOB-v02.0-fv04.2.nc is a > publicly accessible NASA file. Would you advise us to remove these? > > Thanks, > Stepheny > > >> On 2022/12/20 00:17:00 Julian Hyde wrote: >> The vote email is much improved; thank you! >> >> I downloaded the artifacts using svn, checked signatures (.asc files), >> LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, VERSION.txt, file headers; I verified >> that the contents of each tar file matches the corresponding git >> commit. Checked for binary files. >> >> I see that hashes of the src.tar.gz files have changed since the >> previous rc2 vote, and they are signed with your key rather than Nga's >> key. That's OK. >> >> I see that sdap-ingester contains some large binary files with .nc, >> .h5 and .nc4 suffixes. Are those files covered by the Apache license? >> Are they generated? (It's OK to include binary files in a release, >> provided that the project owns the copyright, but not OK to include >> generated files.) I am going to assume that they are owned by the >> project and not generated; please let me know if I am mistaken. >> >> +1 (binding) >> >> Julian >> >> PS Riley: Yes, you definitely can vote. RMs usually add the following >> line to their vote emails: "Here's my vote: +1 (binding)". >> >> PPS Since we have one only one active mentor, I am going to ask other >> IPMC members to take a look at these artifacts and vote. Even if they >> discover problems that I have not, it will still help us get to a good >> release faster. >> >>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 11:17 AM Riley Kuttruff wrote: >>> >>> +1 from me too if I can. >>> >>> Riley >>> >>> On 2022/12/19 19:05:43 Stepheny Perez wrote: +1 Stepheny On 2022/12/19 18:58:47 Riley Kuttruff wrote: > Hello everyone, > > This is the second attempt to approve Apache SDAP (incubating) > release candidate rc2 for version 1.0.0. > > There were no changes to the code between this and the previous > attempt to release rc2. > > Changes made between previous candidate (rc1) and this one (rc2) are > as > follows: > - Added README > - Added DISCLAIMER > > Instructions for building docker images from source can be found here: > https://incubator-sdap-nexus.readthedocs.io/en/latest/build.html > Instructions for deploying locally to test can be found here: > https://incubator-sdap-nexus.readthedocs.io/en/latest/quickstart.html > > The tags to be voted on are 1.0.0-rc2: > > - nexusproto: > - URL: > https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-nexusproto/tree/1.0.0-rc2 > - Commit: f3c726e69997436dd9ee6f9a993d4c95ee490b6f > - ingester: > - URL: > https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-ingester/tree/1.0.0-rc2 > - Commit: 2c8a9d35320f11a5db2534802f43366ddaff2fea > - nexus: > - URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-nexus/tree/1.0.0-rc2 > - Commit: f60e98331ac29b57ca40322f8f96e98a5c69e553 > > The release files, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found > at: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/sdap/apache-sdap-1.0.0-rc2/ > > For verification, the hashes (SHA-512) of the .tar.gz artifacts we > are voting on are as follows: > > apache-sdap-ingester-1.0.0-src.tar.gz: > db380c3002351e65ec3581a3ff0cacbb7092f46292b0a656a78a919e1409738442e845731050a2160a556a7818f22b2ab4bb6da437200bc0a62419332de49ad7 > >
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] Towards release 0.4.5a56
Thanks Julian, I'll try to get the thread started by EOD. Can I ask what you mean by logging cases? Is that like creating issues on Jira? Thanks, Riley On 2022/12/22 23:37:44 Julian Hyde wrote: > PS Don’t make a new RC. The IPMC will vote on the exact same artifacts. > > Julian > > > On Dec 22, 2022, at 15:20, Julian Hyde wrote: > > > > Next step is to carry out a vote on the gene...@incubator.apache.org list. > > > > This may seem like unnecessary bureaucracy; for which I apologize. The > > reason is that only a PMC (in this case the Incubator PMC, IPMC) may > > release code on behalf of the ASF. > > > > Practically speaking, the release will receive due diligence by experts in > > the IPMC. It’s likely that they will find problems, and if so, we may need > > another RC, and two votes, to resolve them. Please be patient, because this > > is the learning process. > > > > Riley, Glad to see that you have sent a RESULT email already. Please start > > a vote thread on general@, referencing the thread on dev@. Good luck! > > > > Can you also log cases for the issues I noted during the vote. The IPMC > > tends to be lenient for the first release, especially if the podling is > > learning and improving. > > > > Julian > > > >> On Dec 22, 2022, at 11:44, Riley Kuttruff wrote: > >> > >> So the vote for rc2 passed. What are our next steps? Do I push the > >> .tar.gz and .asc files to > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/incubator/sdap ? > >> > On 2022/12/14 20:04:29 Riley Kuttruff wrote: > >>> I verified, built and tested the release tarballs in the same manner I > >>> did before and it passed just the same. > >>> > >>> I believe it's compliant with ASF policy but I'm not 100% sure so I'm > >>> holding off on the vote. > >>> - We added DISCLAIMER & README files to all release tarballs > >>> - I went through and checked MOST of the files for the ASF license > >>> headers and added them where needed though I may have missed something > >>> > On 2022/12/13 19:36:26 Nga Chung wrote: > HI all, > > I started a VOTE thread for 1.0.0rc2, but can someone else please > volunteer > to take over as release manager because I will be away 12/16/22 - > 1/16/23. > > I captured initial release instructions here > https://github.com/ngachung/incubator-sdap-nexus/blob/SDAP-414/docs/release.rst > > Thanks, > Nga > > > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:07 AM Julian Hyde wrote: > > > By the way, I wouldn't create a new RC for the vote. Just vote on the > > RC1 you already have. We know we'll need to iterate through a few RCs > > before we get a good one. > > > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:05 AM Julian Hyde wrote: > >> > >> Hey, that looks pretty good! In fact it looks a lot like an Apache > > release. > >> > >> A few things: > >> > >> 1. I saw you added dist/dev/incubator/sdap/KEYS; can you move that > >> file so that its path is dist/release/incubator/sdap/KEYS. Its main > >> purpose will be for people who download the release after it has been > >> released and want to verify the signatures. Putting it in 'release' > >> will ensure that it is automatically mirrored to > >> https://downloads.apache.org > >> > >> 2. I got the following output from gpg: > >> > >> gpg: Signature made Mon 05 Dec 2022 10:52:22 PM PST > >> gpg:using RSA key > > 1392A8A11801359247A803D8D2449E0EB5EF1E73 > >> gpg: Good signature from "Nga Chung (CODE SIGNING KEY) > >> " [unknown] > >> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > >> gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the > > owner. > >> > >> This means that the artifacts are signed correctly, but you are not in > >> my web of trust. Soon after the release, we should have a key-signing > >> party (or you should get your key signed by a colleague who has a > >> well-connected key). > >> > >> 3. At first glance, the contents of the .tar.gz files look pretty > >> good. I haven't checked the headers etc. yet. There seems to be a > >> LICENSE.txt and NOTICE in each, which is good. You should also add a > >> DISCLAIMER and/or DISCLAIMER-WIP file (required by the incubation > >> process [1]). I also recommend adding a top-level README in each > >> .tar.gz that describes the purpose of the file, and how to build it > >> (for example see Calcite's README [2]) > >> > >> A good next step would be to start a vote. Craft an email with the > >> same general structure as Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc2 [3] and > >> send it to dev@. Then PPMC members should vote on the release, each > >> describing the checks that they made. Then finish the vote with an > >> email with a [RESULT][VOTE] or [CANCEL][VOTE] subject line. (We know >
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] Towards release 0.4.5a56
PS Don’t make a new RC. The IPMC will vote on the exact same artifacts. Julian > On Dec 22, 2022, at 15:20, Julian Hyde wrote: > > Next step is to carry out a vote on the gene...@incubator.apache.org list. > > This may seem like unnecessary bureaucracy; for which I apologize. The reason > is that only a PMC (in this case the Incubator PMC, IPMC) may release code on > behalf of the ASF. > > Practically speaking, the release will receive due diligence by experts in > the IPMC. It’s likely that they will find problems, and if so, we may need > another RC, and two votes, to resolve them. Please be patient, because this > is the learning process. > > Riley, Glad to see that you have sent a RESULT email already. Please start a > vote thread on general@, referencing the thread on dev@. Good luck! > > Can you also log cases for the issues I noted during the vote. The IPMC tends > to be lenient for the first release, especially if the podling is learning > and improving. > > Julian > >> On Dec 22, 2022, at 11:44, Riley Kuttruff wrote: >> >> So the vote for rc2 passed. What are our next steps? Do I push the .tar.gz >> and .asc files to https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/incubator/sdap ? >> On 2022/12/14 20:04:29 Riley Kuttruff wrote: >>> I verified, built and tested the release tarballs in the same manner I did >>> before and it passed just the same. >>> >>> I believe it's compliant with ASF policy but I'm not 100% sure so I'm >>> holding off on the vote. >>> - We added DISCLAIMER & README files to all release tarballs >>> - I went through and checked MOST of the files for the ASF license headers >>> and added them where needed though I may have missed something >>> On 2022/12/13 19:36:26 Nga Chung wrote: HI all, I started a VOTE thread for 1.0.0rc2, but can someone else please volunteer to take over as release manager because I will be away 12/16/22 - 1/16/23. I captured initial release instructions here https://github.com/ngachung/incubator-sdap-nexus/blob/SDAP-414/docs/release.rst Thanks, Nga > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:07 AM Julian Hyde wrote: > By the way, I wouldn't create a new RC for the vote. Just vote on the > RC1 you already have. We know we'll need to iterate through a few RCs > before we get a good one. > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:05 AM Julian Hyde wrote: >> >> Hey, that looks pretty good! In fact it looks a lot like an Apache > release. >> >> A few things: >> >> 1. I saw you added dist/dev/incubator/sdap/KEYS; can you move that >> file so that its path is dist/release/incubator/sdap/KEYS. Its main >> purpose will be for people who download the release after it has been >> released and want to verify the signatures. Putting it in 'release' >> will ensure that it is automatically mirrored to >> https://downloads.apache.org >> >> 2. I got the following output from gpg: >> >> gpg: Signature made Mon 05 Dec 2022 10:52:22 PM PST >> gpg:using RSA key > 1392A8A11801359247A803D8D2449E0EB5EF1E73 >> gpg: Good signature from "Nga Chung (CODE SIGNING KEY) >> " [unknown] >> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! >> gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the > owner. >> >> This means that the artifacts are signed correctly, but you are not in >> my web of trust. Soon after the release, we should have a key-signing >> party (or you should get your key signed by a colleague who has a >> well-connected key). >> >> 3. At first glance, the contents of the .tar.gz files look pretty >> good. I haven't checked the headers etc. yet. There seems to be a >> LICENSE.txt and NOTICE in each, which is good. You should also add a >> DISCLAIMER and/or DISCLAIMER-WIP file (required by the incubation >> process [1]). I also recommend adding a top-level README in each >> .tar.gz that describes the purpose of the file, and how to build it >> (for example see Calcite's README [2]) >> >> A good next step would be to start a vote. Craft an email with the >> same general structure as Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc2 [3] and >> send it to dev@. Then PPMC members should vote on the release, each >> describing the checks that they made. Then finish the vote with an >> email with a [RESULT][VOTE] or [CANCEL][VOTE] subject line. (We know >> the vote will fail, due to the missing DISCLAIMER file, but it's good >> to practice the process, and with many people scrutinizing the release >> we will find issues faster.) >> >> You'll also want to craft release notes (they don't have to be in the >> release, but they should be somewhere accessible for people to read). >> >> And you should be writing that "how to" guide as you go along,
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] Towards release 0.4.5a56
Next step is to carry out a vote on the gene...@incubator.apache.org list. This may seem like unnecessary bureaucracy; for which I apologize. The reason is that only a PMC (in this case the Incubator PMC, IPMC) may release code on behalf of the ASF. Practically speaking, the release will receive due diligence by experts in the IPMC. It’s likely that they will find problems, and if so, we may need another RC, and two votes, to resolve them. Please be patient, because this is the learning process. Riley, Glad to see that you have sent a RESULT email already. Please start a vote thread on general@, referencing the thread on dev@. Good luck! Can you also log cases for the issues I noted during the vote. The IPMC tends to be lenient for the first release, especially if the podling is learning and improving. Julian > On Dec 22, 2022, at 11:44, Riley Kuttruff wrote: > > So the vote for rc2 passed. What are our next steps? Do I push the .tar.gz > and .asc files to https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/incubator/sdap ? > >> On 2022/12/14 20:04:29 Riley Kuttruff wrote: >> I verified, built and tested the release tarballs in the same manner I did >> before and it passed just the same. >> >> I believe it's compliant with ASF policy but I'm not 100% sure so I'm >> holding off on the vote. >> - We added DISCLAIMER & README files to all release tarballs >> - I went through and checked MOST of the files for the ASF license headers >> and added them where needed though I may have missed something >> >>> On 2022/12/13 19:36:26 Nga Chung wrote: >>> HI all, >>> >>> I started a VOTE thread for 1.0.0rc2, but can someone else please volunteer >>> to take over as release manager because I will be away 12/16/22 - 1/16/23. >>> >>> I captured initial release instructions here >>> https://github.com/ngachung/incubator-sdap-nexus/blob/SDAP-414/docs/release.rst >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Nga >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:07 AM Julian Hyde wrote: >>> By the way, I wouldn't create a new RC for the vote. Just vote on the RC1 you already have. We know we'll need to iterate through a few RCs before we get a good one. On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:05 AM Julian Hyde wrote: > > Hey, that looks pretty good! In fact it looks a lot like an Apache release. > > A few things: > > 1. I saw you added dist/dev/incubator/sdap/KEYS; can you move that > file so that its path is dist/release/incubator/sdap/KEYS. Its main > purpose will be for people who download the release after it has been > released and want to verify the signatures. Putting it in 'release' > will ensure that it is automatically mirrored to > https://downloads.apache.org > > 2. I got the following output from gpg: > > gpg: Signature made Mon 05 Dec 2022 10:52:22 PM PST > gpg:using RSA key 1392A8A11801359247A803D8D2449E0EB5EF1E73 > gpg: Good signature from "Nga Chung (CODE SIGNING KEY) > " [unknown] > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > > This means that the artifacts are signed correctly, but you are not in > my web of trust. Soon after the release, we should have a key-signing > party (or you should get your key signed by a colleague who has a > well-connected key). > > 3. At first glance, the contents of the .tar.gz files look pretty > good. I haven't checked the headers etc. yet. There seems to be a > LICENSE.txt and NOTICE in each, which is good. You should also add a > DISCLAIMER and/or DISCLAIMER-WIP file (required by the incubation > process [1]). I also recommend adding a top-level README in each > .tar.gz that describes the purpose of the file, and how to build it > (for example see Calcite's README [2]) > > A good next step would be to start a vote. Craft an email with the > same general structure as Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc2 [3] and > send it to dev@. Then PPMC members should vote on the release, each > describing the checks that they made. Then finish the vote with an > email with a [RESULT][VOTE] or [CANCEL][VOTE] subject line. (We know > the vote will fail, due to the missing DISCLAIMER file, but it's good > to practice the process, and with many people scrutinizing the release > we will find issues faster.) > > You'll also want to craft release notes (they don't have to be in the > release, but they should be somewhere accessible for people to read). > > And you should be writing that "how to" guide as you go along, if > you're not already. > > Julian > > [1] https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#disclaimers > [2] https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/README > [3]
[GitHub] [incubator-sdap-ingester] RKuttruff opened a new pull request, #69: SDAP-417: Prevent SolrStore from generating documents with incorrect WKT for small tiles
RKuttruff opened a new pull request, #69: URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-ingester/pull/69 For narrow tiles (max/min lat/lon difference ~<0.001) the generated WKT for the geo field for the Solr document would essentially collapse to a lower dimensional shape while being described as a higher dimensional shape (ie a POLYGON that was a line or a LINESTRING that was a point). Solr would throw an error when trying to write such documents, which has been observed occurring when ingesting granules for the VIIRS_NPP-JPL-L2P-v2016.2 dataset. To fix this, we now check to see if the collapse will occur (if the bbox values differ but the string representations don't) and then force the string representations of the max/min values to have at least a 0.001 difference. This has been tested successfully with a granule that previously caused this issue. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@sdap.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] Towards release 0.4.5a56
So the vote for rc2 passed. What are our next steps? Do I push the .tar.gz and .asc files to https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/incubator/sdap ? On 2022/12/14 20:04:29 Riley Kuttruff wrote: > I verified, built and tested the release tarballs in the same manner I did > before and it passed just the same. > > I believe it's compliant with ASF policy but I'm not 100% sure so I'm holding > off on the vote. > - We added DISCLAIMER & README files to all release tarballs > - I went through and checked MOST of the files for the ASF license headers > and added them where needed though I may have missed something > > On 2022/12/13 19:36:26 Nga Chung wrote: > > HI all, > > > > I started a VOTE thread for 1.0.0rc2, but can someone else please volunteer > > to take over as release manager because I will be away 12/16/22 - 1/16/23. > > > > I captured initial release instructions here > > https://github.com/ngachung/incubator-sdap-nexus/blob/SDAP-414/docs/release.rst > > > > Thanks, > > Nga > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:07 AM Julian Hyde wrote: > > > > > By the way, I wouldn't create a new RC for the vote. Just vote on the > > > RC1 you already have. We know we'll need to iterate through a few RCs > > > before we get a good one. > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:05 AM Julian Hyde wrote: > > > > > > > > Hey, that looks pretty good! In fact it looks a lot like an Apache > > > release. > > > > > > > > A few things: > > > > > > > > 1. I saw you added dist/dev/incubator/sdap/KEYS; can you move that > > > > file so that its path is dist/release/incubator/sdap/KEYS. Its main > > > > purpose will be for people who download the release after it has been > > > > released and want to verify the signatures. Putting it in 'release' > > > > will ensure that it is automatically mirrored to > > > > https://downloads.apache.org > > > > > > > > 2. I got the following output from gpg: > > > > > > > > gpg: Signature made Mon 05 Dec 2022 10:52:22 PM PST > > > > gpg:using RSA key > > > 1392A8A11801359247A803D8D2449E0EB5EF1E73 > > > > gpg: Good signature from "Nga Chung (CODE SIGNING KEY) > > > > " [unknown] > > > > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > > > > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the > > > owner. > > > > > > > > This means that the artifacts are signed correctly, but you are not in > > > > my web of trust. Soon after the release, we should have a key-signing > > > > party (or you should get your key signed by a colleague who has a > > > > well-connected key). > > > > > > > > 3. At first glance, the contents of the .tar.gz files look pretty > > > > good. I haven't checked the headers etc. yet. There seems to be a > > > > LICENSE.txt and NOTICE in each, which is good. You should also add a > > > > DISCLAIMER and/or DISCLAIMER-WIP file (required by the incubation > > > > process [1]). I also recommend adding a top-level README in each > > > > .tar.gz that describes the purpose of the file, and how to build it > > > > (for example see Calcite's README [2]) > > > > > > > > A good next step would be to start a vote. Craft an email with the > > > > same general structure as Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc2 [3] and > > > > send it to dev@. Then PPMC members should vote on the release, each > > > > describing the checks that they made. Then finish the vote with an > > > > email with a [RESULT][VOTE] or [CANCEL][VOTE] subject line. (We know > > > > the vote will fail, due to the missing DISCLAIMER file, but it's good > > > > to practice the process, and with many people scrutinizing the release > > > > we will find issues faster.) > > > > > > > > You'll also want to craft release notes (they don't have to be in the > > > > release, but they should be somewhere accessible for people to read). > > > > > > > > And you should be writing that "how to" guide as you go along, if > > > > you're not already. > > > > > > > > Julian > > > > > > > > [1] https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#disclaimers > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/README > > > > [3] https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncnok4clt6k491zv6c3v4kk2fc41qsz2 > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 11:06 PM Nga Chung wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Riley, thank you for adding all the missing ASF header and the NOTICE. > > > > > > > > > > Riley's changes have been merged and rc1 artifacts have been uploaded > > > to > > > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/sdap/apache-sdap-1.0.0-rc1/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Has anyone had any success testing rc0? > > > > > > > > > > Julian, any suggestions on next steps? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Nga > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:03 PM Kuttruff, Riley K (US 398F-Affiliate) > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > It appears some of the source files are missing the ASF header. I > > > did a > > > > > > check for all the Python files across the repositories and
[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache SDAP (incubating) 1.0.0-rc2
Vote passes with 5 votes. Stepheny Perez Riley Kuttruff Julian Hyde Thomas Loubrieu Thomas Huang Thank you, Riley
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SDAP (incubating) 1.0.0-rc2
Julian, Are PPMC votes implicitly binding or does it need to be explicitly stated? Riley On 2022/12/22 17:27:09 Julian Hyde wrote: > Thomas, (and others on this thread), it is helpful if you provide rationale > for your vote. What steps did you take to verify the release? Did you > encounter any matters of concern? > > Julian > > > On Dec 21, 2022, at 3:05 PM, Thomas G Loubrieu wrote: > > > > +1 > > > >> On 2022/12/20 16:12:07 Julian Hyde wrote: > >> If NASA has contributed these files to SDAP we’re fine. > >> > >> Julian > >> > On Dec 19, 2022, at 5:51 PM, Stepheny Perez wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Julian, > >>> > >>> Those are test files, some are custom but some aren’t. For example > >>> 2018123109-JPL-L4_GHRSST-SSTfnd-MUR25-GLOB-v02.0-fv04.2.nc is a > >>> publicly accessible NASA file. Would you advise us to remove these? > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Stepheny > >>> > >>> > On 2022/12/20 00:17:00 Julian Hyde wrote: > The vote email is much improved; thank you! > > I downloaded the artifacts using svn, checked signatures (.asc files), > LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, VERSION.txt, file headers; I verified > that the contents of each tar file matches the corresponding git > commit. Checked for binary files. > > I see that hashes of the src.tar.gz files have changed since the > previous rc2 vote, and they are signed with your key rather than Nga's > key. That's OK. > > I see that sdap-ingester contains some large binary files with .nc, > .h5 and .nc4 suffixes. Are those files covered by the Apache license? > Are they generated? (It's OK to include binary files in a release, > provided that the project owns the copyright, but not OK to include > generated files.) I am going to assume that they are owned by the > project and not generated; please let me know if I am mistaken. > > +1 (binding) > > Julian > > PS Riley: Yes, you definitely can vote. RMs usually add the following > line to their vote emails: "Here's my vote: +1 (binding)". > > PPS Since we have one only one active mentor, I am going to ask other > IPMC members to take a look at these artifacts and vote. Even if they > discover problems that I have not, it will still help us get to a good > release faster. > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 11:17 AM Riley Kuttruff wrote: > > > > +1 from me too if I can. > > > > Riley > > > > On 2022/12/19 19:05:43 Stepheny Perez wrote: > >> +1 > >> > >> Stepheny > >> > >> On 2022/12/19 18:58:47 Riley Kuttruff wrote: > >>> Hello everyone, > >>> > >>> This is the second attempt to approve Apache SDAP (incubating) > >>> release candidate rc2 for version 1.0.0. > >>> > >>> There were no changes to the code between this and the previous > >>> attempt to release rc2. > >>> > >>> Changes made between previous candidate (rc1) and this one (rc2) are > >>> as > >>> follows: > >>> - Added README > >>> - Added DISCLAIMER > >>> > >>> Instructions for building docker images from source can be found here: > >>> https://incubator-sdap-nexus.readthedocs.io/en/latest/build.html > >>> Instructions for deploying locally to test can be found here: > >>> https://incubator-sdap-nexus.readthedocs.io/en/latest/quickstart.html > >>> > >>> The tags to be voted on are 1.0.0-rc2: > >>> > >>> - nexusproto: > >>> - URL: > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-nexusproto/tree/1.0.0-rc2 > >>> - Commit: f3c726e69997436dd9ee6f9a993d4c95ee490b6f > >>> - ingester: > >>> - URL: > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-ingester/tree/1.0.0-rc2 > >>> - Commit: 2c8a9d35320f11a5db2534802f43366ddaff2fea > >>> - nexus: > >>> - URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-nexus/tree/1.0.0-rc2 > >>> - Commit: f60e98331ac29b57ca40322f8f96e98a5c69e553 > >>> > >>> The release files, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found > >>> at: > >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/sdap/apache-sdap-1.0.0-rc2/ > >>> > >>> For verification, the hashes (SHA-512) of the .tar.gz artifacts we > >>> are voting on are as follows: > >>> > >>> apache-sdap-ingester-1.0.0-src.tar.gz: > >>> db380c3002351e65ec3581a3ff0cacbb7092f46292b0a656a78a919e1409738442e845731050a2160a556a7818f22b2ab4bb6da437200bc0a62419332de49ad7 > >>> > >>> apache-sdap-nexus-1.0.0-src.tar.gz: > >>> da34e9830cf5126bac498180d7cdd95bc2cfc13535c7b4355ba51de64e3589a385a969e0cf1a89fa77e436b30c99a48abffab4b4ef03b23982aa33c2e83e8dbd > >>> > >>> apache-sdap-nexusproto-1.0.0-src.tar.gz: > >>> 05dc8e96d9c49207750c1da13f630493e8d08f5e68733742c157ac6c85ede29aca25f3c94cd706acbbe21cee41ebc052a880b4d6ce859bf510bcc2d66d8f88b2 > >>> > >>>
[CANCEL][VOTE] Release Apache SDAP (incubating) 1.0.0-rc1
Hello everyone, This vote has been cancelled in favor of the vote on 1.0.0-rc2. Thank you, Riley
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SDAP (incubating) 1.0.0-rc2
Thomas, (and others on this thread), it is helpful if you provide rationale for your vote. What steps did you take to verify the release? Did you encounter any matters of concern? Julian > On Dec 21, 2022, at 3:05 PM, Thomas G Loubrieu wrote: > > +1 > >> On 2022/12/20 16:12:07 Julian Hyde wrote: >> If NASA has contributed these files to SDAP we’re fine. >> >> Julian >> On Dec 19, 2022, at 5:51 PM, Stepheny Perez wrote: >>> >>> Hi Julian, >>> >>> Those are test files, some are custom but some aren’t. For example >>> 2018123109-JPL-L4_GHRSST-SSTfnd-MUR25-GLOB-v02.0-fv04.2.nc is a >>> publicly accessible NASA file. Would you advise us to remove these? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Stepheny >>> >>> On 2022/12/20 00:17:00 Julian Hyde wrote: The vote email is much improved; thank you! I downloaded the artifacts using svn, checked signatures (.asc files), LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, VERSION.txt, file headers; I verified that the contents of each tar file matches the corresponding git commit. Checked for binary files. I see that hashes of the src.tar.gz files have changed since the previous rc2 vote, and they are signed with your key rather than Nga's key. That's OK. I see that sdap-ingester contains some large binary files with .nc, .h5 and .nc4 suffixes. Are those files covered by the Apache license? Are they generated? (It's OK to include binary files in a release, provided that the project owns the copyright, but not OK to include generated files.) I am going to assume that they are owned by the project and not generated; please let me know if I am mistaken. +1 (binding) Julian PS Riley: Yes, you definitely can vote. RMs usually add the following line to their vote emails: "Here's my vote: +1 (binding)". PPS Since we have one only one active mentor, I am going to ask other IPMC members to take a look at these artifacts and vote. Even if they discover problems that I have not, it will still help us get to a good release faster. > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 11:17 AM Riley Kuttruff wrote: > > +1 from me too if I can. > > Riley > > On 2022/12/19 19:05:43 Stepheny Perez wrote: >> +1 >> >> Stepheny >> >> On 2022/12/19 18:58:47 Riley Kuttruff wrote: >>> Hello everyone, >>> >>> This is the second attempt to approve Apache SDAP (incubating) release >>> candidate rc2 for version 1.0.0. >>> >>> There were no changes to the code between this and the previous attempt >>> to release rc2. >>> >>> Changes made between previous candidate (rc1) and this one (rc2) are as >>> follows: >>> - Added README >>> - Added DISCLAIMER >>> >>> Instructions for building docker images from source can be found here: >>> https://incubator-sdap-nexus.readthedocs.io/en/latest/build.html >>> Instructions for deploying locally to test can be found here: >>> https://incubator-sdap-nexus.readthedocs.io/en/latest/quickstart.html >>> >>> The tags to be voted on are 1.0.0-rc2: >>> >>> - nexusproto: >>> - URL: >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-nexusproto/tree/1.0.0-rc2 >>> - Commit: f3c726e69997436dd9ee6f9a993d4c95ee490b6f >>> - ingester: >>> - URL: >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-ingester/tree/1.0.0-rc2 >>> - Commit: 2c8a9d35320f11a5db2534802f43366ddaff2fea >>> - nexus: >>> - URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-nexus/tree/1.0.0-rc2 >>> - Commit: f60e98331ac29b57ca40322f8f96e98a5c69e553 >>> >>> The release files, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found at: >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/sdap/apache-sdap-1.0.0-rc2/ >>> >>> For verification, the hashes (SHA-512) of the .tar.gz artifacts we are >>> voting on are as follows: >>> >>> apache-sdap-ingester-1.0.0-src.tar.gz: >>> db380c3002351e65ec3581a3ff0cacbb7092f46292b0a656a78a919e1409738442e845731050a2160a556a7818f22b2ab4bb6da437200bc0a62419332de49ad7 >>> >>> apache-sdap-nexus-1.0.0-src.tar.gz: >>> da34e9830cf5126bac498180d7cdd95bc2cfc13535c7b4355ba51de64e3589a385a969e0cf1a89fa77e436b30c99a48abffab4b4ef03b23982aa33c2e83e8dbd >>> >>> apache-sdap-nexusproto-1.0.0-src.tar.gz: >>> 05dc8e96d9c49207750c1da13f630493e8d08f5e68733742c157ac6c85ede29aca25f3c94cd706acbbe21cee41ebc052a880b4d6ce859bf510bcc2d66d8f88b2 >>> >>> Release artifacts are signed with the following key: >>> https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x4e98c4a32026656e14e0b570fc20035a010e3b7b >>> >>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache SDAP (incubating) 1.0.0. >>> >>> The vote is open for 72 hours and passes if at least 3 +1 PMC votes are >>> cast. >>> >>> PLEASE NOTE: Do not reply with
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SDAP (incubating) 1.0.0-rc1
Riley, as interim release manager, can you please send a [CANCEL] email. Every vote thread needs to be finished. Julian > On Dec 21, 2022, at 3:04 PM, Thomas G Loubrieu wrote: > > +1 > >> On 2022/12/08 22:40:48 Riley Kuttruff wrote: >> All release files have been verified, built and tested successfully; >> however, they are missing some required files (DISCLAIMER). >> >> -1 (binding) from me >> >>> On 2022/12/08 22:33:25 Nga Chung wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> This is the first release candidate of Apache SDAP (incubating) version >>> 1.0.0 >>> >>> Instructions for building docker images from source can be found here: >>> https://incubator-sdap-nexus.readthedocs.io/en/latest/build.html >>> Instructions for deploying locally to test can be found here: >>> https://incubator-sdap-nexus.readthedocs.io/en/latest/quickstart.html >>> >>> The tags to be voted on are 1.0.0-rc1: >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-nexusproto/tree/1.0.0-rc1 >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-ingester/tree/1.0.0-rc1 >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-nexus/tree/1.0.0-rc1 >>> >>> The release files, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found at: >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/sdap/apache-sdap-1.0.0-rc1/ >>> >>> Release artifacts are signed with the following key: >>> https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0xD2449E0EB5EF1E73 >>> >>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache SDAP (incubating) 1.0.0. >>> >>> The vote is open for 72 hours and passes if at least 3 +1 PMC votes are >>> cast. >>> >>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache SDAP (incubating) 1.0.0 >>> [ ] +0 No opinion >>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Nga >>> >>
