Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 06:05:22PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. Reminder: We still need one windows sig for 1.6.18. Anyone, please speak up if you are intending to provide the missing signature. If we don't get a word within 24h I will consider releasing with just two Windows signatures. 1.6.18 has been waiting for signatures for more than 2 weeks now.
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 6:03 AM, Stefan Sperling s...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 06:05:22PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. Reminder: We still need one windows sig for 1.6.18. Anyone, please speak up if you are intending to provide the missing signature. If we don't get a word within 24h I will consider releasing with just two Windows signatures. 1.6.18 has been waiting for signatures for more than 2 weeks now. I will not be providing Windows signatures. My build system is not setup for 1.6.x. I spent some time trying to get it to work but was not successful and do not have any more time to spend on it. -- Thanks Mark Phippard http://markphip.blogspot.com/
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 5:03 AM, Stefan Sperling s...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 06:05:22PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. Reminder: We still need one windows sig for 1.6.18. Anyone, please speak up if you are intending to provide the missing signature. If we don't get a word within 24h I will consider releasing with just two Windows signatures. 1.6.18 has been waiting for signatures for more than 2 weeks now. +1 -- uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy http://www.uberSVN.com/
RE: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
-Original Message- From: Hyrum K Wright [mailto:hyrum.wri...@wandisco.com] Sent: dinsdag 10 april 2012 15:39 To: dev@subversion.apache.org Subject: Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 5:03 AM, Stefan Sperling s...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 06:05:22PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. Reminder: We still need one windows sig for 1.6.18. Anyone, please speak up if you are intending to provide the missing signature. If we don't get a word within 24h I will consider releasing with just two Windows signatures. 1.6.18 has been waiting for signatures for more than 2 weeks now. +1 +1 Bert
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. Reminder: We still need one windows sig for 1.6.18.
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Stefan Sperling s...@apache.org wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. You can use the release.py script for this: release.py sign-candidates --target /path/to/dist/dev/subversion/wc 1.6.18 which is the equivalent of running the following command for each tarball: gpg -ba -f - subversion-1.6.18.tar.bz2 subversion-1.6.18.tar.bz2.asc Since this is a 1.6.x release there are -dep tarballs which should also be signed by those who test them. I've run a test build with these dependencies on a Debian Linux system. While signatures for this release are collected via dist.apache.org the release won't be made from apache.org but from tigris.org. Downstream packagers, please keep in mind that this release is not blessed yet. Please do not distribute binaries compiled from these sources before the release has been officially announced. This release may still be pulled and supplanted by a different one (with a new version number) in case of unforeseen problems during the testing phase. Concerning the Windows sigs: I'm afraid I can't help ATM. Though my interest in another 1.6 release is quite low from a personal standpoint (and @work we're about to migrate everyone to 1.7), I wouldn't mind letting my laptop do some useful work to be able to provide a sig. It's just that ... it's been a hell of a busy week both @home and @work for me, so I haven't gotten around to it. So I hope some of the other Windows devs can do it. If not, I'll try to make some time during the weekend, and send my signature by Monday morning. -- Johan
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 01:41:50PM -0400, Greg Stein wrote: On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 07:04, Stefan Sperling s...@elego.de wrote: ... Maybe this is not important and I'll just leave this as it is and mention the problem as a known test suite issue with APR 1.4.6 in the release notes. +1 to this approach. Packagers who worry about the test failures can simply grab a different APR release. Right, let's handle it that way. Philip pointed out that the 1.6.18 tarball contains the www/ directory while 1.6.17 did not. This was a small packaging glitch on my part. I fixed the rolling scripts on trunk to avoid this problem in future 1.6.x releases. Inspite of these minor packaging glitches I am NOT going to re-roll any of the 1.6.18 tarballs.
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. Just a reminder: We are still short on 2 *nix and 2 windows sigs for 1.6.18.
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On 03/29/2012 09:10 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. Just a reminder: We are still short on 2 *nix and 2 windows sigs for 1.6.18. Stefan, I confess that I mentally unsubscribed from this thread after the initial notices about the wrong APR version being included in the dist tarball. Can you briefly summarize the state of the release right now? Was a new dist tarball created, or did we just agree to go with what was originally posted? -- C. Michael Pilato cmpil...@collab.net CollabNet www.collab.net Distributed Development On Demand signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 09:13:48AM -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote: On 03/29/2012 09:10 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. Just a reminder: We are still short on 2 *nix and 2 windows sigs for 1.6.18. Stefan, I confess that I mentally unsubscribed from this thread after the initial notices about the wrong APR version being included in the dist tarball. Can you briefly summarize the state of the release right now? Was a new dist tarball created, or did we just agree to go with what was originally posted? The state is that we're going to release 1.6.18 as it is. We're not re-rolling anything. Please add your signatures. See my other recent post to this thread for details. It seems I've caused some confusion. Sorry about that.
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Stefan Sperling s...@elego.de wrote: It seems I've caused some confusion. Sorry about that. All part of the RM hazing process. :) -Hyrum -- uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy http://www.uberSVN.com/
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On 03/29/2012 06:10 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. Just a reminder: We are still short on 2 *nix and 2 windows sigs for 1.6.18. Working on a Unix signature. The tar and zip deps are different, zip appears to contain apr 1.4.5 and the tar contains apr 1.4.6. I suggest unpacking both and doing a diff -rwu, there's some other differences also, such as a missing apr-iconv in the zip. Blair
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On 03/29/2012 09:10 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. Summary: +1 to release. Platform: Ubuntu 10.04.3 (lucid) Linux (x86) Python 2.6.5 Perl 5.10.1 Ruby 1.8.7 Java 1.6.0 Verified: I tested the following (with pre-installed dependencies): (local, svn, neon, serf) x (bdb, fsfs) \ + py + pl + rb + javahl + ctypes-python All tests pass except 'pl', which all fail. But then, they all fail for me on trunk, too. And they fail in a way that indicates an environmental issue. SHA1 Checksums: af81c6ac2543f1fa2466d39841377ef2ce1c92bd subversion-1.6.18.tar.gz 2a9e07cf03ee5f4a9ddb191520c7080f00048f0e subversion-deps-1.6.18.tar.gz 7f3275ccacc1e793841d9e14da313f57e6ebd160 subversion-1.6.18.tar.bz2 0af6393aab378e98a5bc114e32d82388f5e0ad68 subversion-deps-1.6.18.tar.bz2 GPG Signatures ::: subversion-1.6.18.tar.gz ::: -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk90bnEACgkQokEGqRcG/W5i7QCeJoIydLOuNxjw02zxW/3zg/L/ E1MAoLr9lNaGIOeaC0HIcS7jhm5350p+ =6siv -END PGP SIGNATURE- ::: subversion-1.6.18.tar.bz2 ::: -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk90bnEACgkQokEGqRcG/W6gaQCfYROKqq2v8iw4C2BCqGE5X+Cf ifAAn15mwE0s7fumiUhpit/VHnWLvdnV =kY/w -END PGP SIGNATURE- ::: subversion-deps-1.6.18.tar.gz ::: -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk90bnEACgkQokEGqRcG/W62GQCfb/hI6pBwTUaFBt5k5u3CvvF7 DG8AoM00bJEJaV+b1Ai2sL1MsfaESJR5 =beZo -END PGP SIGNATURE- ::: subversion-deps-1.6.18.tar.bz2 ::: -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk90bnEACgkQokEGqRcG/W5yKwCfQFHRSYrFjLXhX3Yhbo1G91sw co0AoJfCAMwAcVlLg0x2JYIqms6yrdiH =M3Dx -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- C. Michael Pilato cmpil...@collab.net CollabNet www.collab.net Distributed Development On Demand signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:44:08AM -0700, Blair Zajac wrote: The tar and zip deps are different, zip appears to contain apr 1.4.5 and the tar contains apr 1.4.6. I suggest unpacking both and doing a diff -rwu, there's some other differences also, such as a missing apr-iconv in the zip. You're right. That is because the win32 deps use APR from httpd-2.2.22, while the unix deps use their own APR. I just used a script based on some old code that was apparently used for rolling -deps tarballs for older 1.6.x releases. See the revision log of https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/tools/dist/make-deps-tarball.sh I didn't pay attention to which APR version ships with httpd-2.2.22 though. Oh well. Next time we'll do better :)
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On 03/29/2012 11:44 AM, Blair Zajac wrote: On 03/29/2012 06:10 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. Just a reminder: We are still short on 2 *nix and 2 windows sigs for 1.6.18. Working on a Unix signature. The tar and zip deps are different, zip appears to contain apr 1.4.5 and the tar contains apr 1.4.6. I suggest unpacking both and doing a diff -rwu, there's some other differences also, such as a missing apr-iconv in the zip. +1 for release. Tested on the following OSes: == Centos 4.4 i386 and x86_64 Dependencies (most are *not* from the OS): APR 1.3.8 APR-util 1.3.9 Berkeley DB 4.6.21 SQLite 3.6.20 SWIG 1.3.25 Neon 0.28.3 Java 6u26 Perl 5.8.5 Python 2.4.1 Ruby 1.8.5.2 Verified: (local, svn) x (bdb, fsfs) + py + pl + rb + javahl All tests pass == Oracle Linux 5.5 Dependencies (most are *not* from the OS): APR 1.3.12 APR-util 1.3.10 Berkeley DB 4.6.21 SQLite 3.6.20 SWIG 1.3.25 Neon 0.28.4 Java 6u30 Perl 5.8.8 Python 2.4.3 Ruby 1.8.5.2 Verified: (local, svn) x (bdb, fsfs) + py + pl + rb + javahl All tests pass == Oracle Linux 6.2 Dependencies (most are from the OS): APR 1.3.9 APR-util 1.3.9 SQLite 3.6.20 SWIG 1.3.40 Neon 0.29.3 Java 1.5.0 Perl 5.10.1 Python 2.6.6 Ruby 1.8.7 Verified: (local) x (fsfs) + py + pl All tests pass Blair
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
Summary: +1 to release Platform: Linux (Debian/squeeze) Tested: (local, svn, svn+sasl, serf, neon) x (fsfs, fsfs/pack/shard, bdb) (serf/v1, neon/v1) x (fsfs, bdb) swig-pl, swig-py, swig-rb javahl x (fsfs, bdb) Results: All tests PASS Local dependencies Debian: apache2-threaded-dev : 2.2.16-6+squeeze6 libapr1-dev : 1.4.2-6+squeeze3 libaprutil1-dev : 1.3.9+dfsg-5 libdb4.8-dev : 4.8.30-2 libneon27-dev : 0.29.3-3 libsasl2-dev : 2.1.23.dfsg1-7 libsqlite3-dev : 3.7.10-1~bpo60+1 perl : 5.10.1-17squeeze3 python2.6-dev : 2.6.6-8+b1 ruby1.8-dev : 1.8.7.302-2squeeze1 openjdk-6-jdk : 6b18-1.8.13-0+sqeeze1 serf : 0.3.1 subversion-1.6.18.tar.bz2 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAABCAAGBQJPcYtNAAoJEHbXiOHtGlmcbfkH/0v5yGaU0lKezJK1TqryW9X7 U3up/gEP3B7qvhUzl8rDQflZCM+s7+aHsNbowJKGKUbDwb5I0kmB4f2/+r9vWUFp 9eYDOOC1CZnVb+LaHCjMsM5CE22+s/HBVzzOm0vhpc0Fd+1AyTsB3TReGXs5InGm AGCYMX4KY79izoLjawoo0u8ot8zcxowUlwKqL/h/pwXyrv1WVcXHB7MpjhEtQkhC JmrMmpPjEB+XBmvGVLdm+ZcwlWmjFt/RdHhJDM+qB4usS12TIwbHR3URQv1fFO3s rEfrq6CRqY0kdrzr37ICuLVpk7ZWcaRfak5xa4XQlr1Tag8PwsmEe6nICX6324w= =tj7C -END PGP SIGNATURE- subversion-1.6.18.tar.gz -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAABCAAGBQJPcYtjAAoJEHbXiOHtGlmcGPoIAKvIT6VR3fMT+3UmrakofAnD QweUCzGLgiGd7oBiRJGcZCzTFDs850On4Sk8d6UDJdC2sQJ1y8hXJO7Sx2Nl37vO o5vTCwU2/sTCZUj1NinQh00Poof1u3uF4Wux5w2PNcb+bbagNRrwXWyEvO5iEu1d fmyUmkXARPx0cPfj/OHtIEm1S2EFrAkNTZZUJBsaZwY51v737zQXuzacDNTTYSlm AI7EFEW8xwEr4y9eOq7knOTf2Xl4kXE4dvXAi/6YUMxAgCJ8YYP0EUsTg/ygai2b Sa5GtIZVoj4SRMxwP4V5wPjKuE+Wjubz1qOZv920rN14L2rZm+d/62Wdf93Q/Z0= =I6a/ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy http://www.uberSVN.com
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 07:04, Stefan Sperling s...@elego.de wrote: ... Maybe this is not important and I'll just leave this as it is and mention the problem as a known test suite issue with APR 1.4.6 in the release notes. +1 to this approach. Packagers who worry about the test failures can simply grab a different APR release. Cheers, -g
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 01:17:17PM -0700, Blair Zajac wrote: On 03/24/2012 03:13 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Since this is a 1.6.x release there are -dep tarballs which should also be signed by those who test them. I've run a test build with these dependencies on a Debian Linux system. I made a slight mistake by putting APR 1.4.6 into the -deps tarball while the 1.6.x test suite isn't prepared to deal with the APR hash ordering changes. Should we re-roll the deps tarball with APR 1.4.5? I'd call this a packaging bug and re-use the existing version number. Nobody but myself has signed the -deps tarball yet. Don't we have a hard and fast policy on this? Version numbers are cheap. Depends. The current rules are: If a release or candidate release needs to be quickly re-issued due to some non-code problem (say, a packaging glitch), it's okay to reuse the same name, as long as the tarball hasn't been blessed by signing yet. But if it has been uploaded to the standard distribution area with signatures, or if the re-issue was due to a change in code a user might run, then the old name must be tossed and the next name used. http://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/releasing.html#name-reuse IANAL, but how this applies to the situation at hand seems to be a matter of interpretation. Nobody except me has signed -deps yet -- does my own signature count towards the signatureS mentioned above? It's not a non-code problem since we're changing APR's code in -deps, but then again it's not a problem in *our* code. Except the test suite code, but we weren't going to make it work with APR 1.4.6 anyway given the lack of related changes for 1.6.18. Maybe this is not important and I'll just leave this as it is and mention the problem as a known test suite issue with APR 1.4.6 in the release notes. Also, do we need to have matching the svn and deps tarball version numbers, so we could bump the deps but leave svn alone? I think historically the numbers have been linked and we would be confusing users if we changed this.
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Since this is a 1.6.x release there are -dep tarballs which should also be signed by those who test them. I've run a test build with these dependencies on a Debian Linux system. I made a slight mistake by putting APR 1.4.6 into the -deps tarball while the 1.6.x test suite isn't prepared to deal with the APR hash ordering changes. Should we re-roll the deps tarball with APR 1.4.5? I'd call this a packaging bug and re-use the existing version number. Nobody but myself has signed the -deps tarball yet. In any case, we'll need to flag the incompatibility with APR 1.4.6 as a known test-suite bug.
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On 03/24/2012 03:13 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: Since this is a 1.6.x release there are -dep tarballs which should also be signed by those who test them. I've run a test build with these dependencies on a Debian Linux system. I made a slight mistake by putting APR 1.4.6 into the -deps tarball while the 1.6.x test suite isn't prepared to deal with the APR hash ordering changes. Should we re-roll the deps tarball with APR 1.4.5? I'd call this a packaging bug and re-use the existing version number. Nobody but myself has signed the -deps tarball yet. Don't we have a hard and fast policy on this? Version numbers are cheap. Also, do we need to have matching the svn and deps tarball version numbers, so we could bump the deps but leave svn alone? BTW, any chance of getting the new svnadmin verify work into 1.6.x? I was thinking it may be worth cutting .19 just to get that in as people may want to easily know if they have an issue with their repositories. Blair
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
Blair Zajac wrote on Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 13:17:17 -0700: BTW, any chance of getting the new svnadmin verify work into 1.6.x? I was thinking it may be worth cutting .19 just to get that in as people may want to easily know if they have an issue with their repositories. That work hasn't been backported even to 1.7 because it uses a new public API, svn_fs_verify(). I agree though that it would be nice to backport those checks, if possible.
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On 03/24/2012 01:40 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: Blair Zajac wrote on Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 13:17:17 -0700: BTW, any chance of getting the new svnadmin verify work into 1.6.x? I was thinking it may be worth cutting .19 just to get that in as people may want to easily know if they have an issue with their repositories. That work hasn't been backported even to 1.7 because it uses a new public API, svn_fs_verify(). We can rename this function and make it private for 1.6 and 1.7. Blair
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
Blair Zajac wrote on Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 14:00:14 -0700: On 03/24/2012 01:40 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: Blair Zajac wrote on Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 13:17:17 -0700: BTW, any chance of getting the new svnadmin verify work into 1.6.x? I was thinking it may be worth cutting .19 just to get that in as people may want to easily know if they have an issue with their repositories. That work hasn't been backported even to 1.7 because it uses a new public API, svn_fs_verify(). We can rename this function and make it private for 1.6 and 1.7. Yes. And revving the fs-loader.h APIs won't be a problem. It's a pretty large patch. And it's really a new feature. But if the patches are applied to 1.6.x or 1.7.x, they'll work fine. Blair
Re: 1.6.18 tarballs up for testing/signing
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Stefan Sperling s...@apache.org wrote: Subversion-1.6.18 tarballs are now available for testing/signing by committers. To obtain them please check out a working copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion Please add your signatures to the .asc files there. You can use the release.py script for this: release.py sign-candidates --target /path/to/dist/dev/subversion/wc 1.6.18 which is the equivalent of running the following command for each tarball: gpg -ba -f - subversion-1.6.18.tar.bz2 subversion-1.6.18.tar.bz2.asc Since this is a 1.6.x release there are -dep tarballs which should also be signed by those who test them. I've run a test build with these dependencies on a Debian Linux system. While signatures for this release are collected via dist.apache.org the release won't be made from apache.org but from tigris.org. VERIFIED: - Stefan's sig for https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion/subversion-1.6.18.zip Other than the expected differences in subversion/include/svn_version.h, https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion/subversion-1.6.18.zip is identical to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/branches/1.6.x@1303927 TESTED: --- JavaHL Bindings [ fsfs | bdb ] x [ file | svn | http (neon) | http (serf) ] RESULTS: All tests pass. +1 to release. PLATFORM: - MS Windows 7 Home Premium 6.1.7600 Build 7600 Intel Core i7 M 620 2.67GHz 4 GB RAM Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 Version 9.0.30729.1 SP DEPENDENCIES: - APR: 1.4.5 APR-UTIL: 1.3.12 Neon: 0.29.5 zlib: 1.2.4 OpenSSL: 0.9.8q Apache: 2.2.19 BDB: 4.8.30 sqlite: 3.7.7.1 Python: 2.6.6 (ActivePython 2.6.6.17) Perl: 5.14.2 Ruby: ruby 1.8.7 java: 1.6.0_21 junit: 4.8.2 swig: 1.3.40 serf: 1.0.3 SIGNATURE: --- user: Paul T. Burba ptbu...@gmail.com 1024-bit DSA key, ID 53FCDC55, created 2006-06-21 For https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion/subversion-1.6.18.zip: -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32) iD8DBQBPbL+U2RaJMFP83FURAsuOAJ0ZAsMpTiJo84i+j0FzwJjH9SmXLACfZN7f uPd4YtdbJp/1uEw04Go+2as= =iOCT -END PGP SIGNATURE- Paul
