The Apache Log4j Transformation Tools 0.1.0 release is now available for voting.
This is the first release and it contains two modules:
* [LOG4J2-3638]: Adds a bytecode transformation tool to provide
location information without reflection.
* [LOG4J2-673]: Adds a resource transformer for the Mave
+1
Verified signatures, checksums, and LICENSE files.
(NOTICE file is missing, but not a blocker, AFAIC.)
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:09 PM Piotr P. Karwasz
wrote:
> The Apache Log4j Transformation Tools 0.1.0 release is now available for
> voting.
>
> This is the first release and it contains tw
Hi Volkan,
On Thu, 4 May 2023 at 09:09, Volkan Yazıcı wrote:
> (NOTICE file is missing, but not a blocker, AFAIC.)
META-INF/{DEPENDENCIES,LICENSE,NOTICE} are generated by the Apache
Maven Remote Resources plugin (courtesy of the ASF parent POM):
https://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-remote-reso
Which tag is it? I see ‘rel/0.1.0-rc1’ and then references to RC2 and RC3?
> On May 2, 2023, at 2:08 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote:
>
> The Apache Log4j Transformation Tools 0.1.0 release is now available for
> voting.
>
> This is the first release and it contains two modules:
>
> * [LOG4J2-3638
And no tag containing the term “rc3” in git, either.
> On May 4, 2023, at 3:09 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> Which tag is it? I see ‘rel/0.1.0-rc1’ and then references to RC2 and RC3?
>
>> On May 2, 2023, at 2:08 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote:
>>
>> The Apache Log4j Transformation Tools 0.1.0 relea
Hi Matt,
On Thu, 4 May 2023 at 22:09, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> Which tag is it? I see ‘rel/0.1.0-rc1’ and then references to RC2 and RC3?
It's `rel/0.1.0-rc1` due to a bug in the CI scripts. I added
`rel/0.1.0-rc3` right now to partially correct it.
Piotr
The vote email says Tag: rel/0.1.0-rc1. That can’t be correct.
Ralph
> On May 4, 2023, at 1:10 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> And no tag containing the term “rc3” in git, either.
>
>> On May 4, 2023, at 3:09 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>>
>> Which tag is it? I see ‘rel/0.1.0-rc1’ and then references
That makes me question what is in the actual release. Tags named “rel/“ are
immutable so you can’t have added anything to that after the first rc.
Ralph
> On May 4, 2023, at 1:31 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote:
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> On Thu, 4 May 2023 at 22:09, Matt Sicker wrote:
>>
>> Which tag is
Hi Ralph,
On Thu, 4 May 2023 at 22:35, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> That makes me question what is in the actual release. Tags named “rel/“ are
> immutable so you can’t have added anything to that after the first rc.
It took me a while to get the automatic release scripts going. So there was:
* re
OK, thanks for the clarification. I do have a strong opinion. Infra made it
clear that rel/ is for tagging releases. Release candidates are NOT releases.
Furthermore, if you find a problem before starting a vote it is very easy to
just delete a non-rel/ tag and rerun the candidate. Once the vote
+1
(With minor reservations)
It built (but took 15 minutes)
The artifact is properly signed.
Verifying the hash still doesn’t work properly
shasum -a 512 --check apache-log4j-transform-0.1.0-src.zip.sha512
shasum: apache-log4j-transform-0.1.0-src.zip.sha512: no properly formatted SHA
checksum l
On Fri, 5 May 2023 at 18:09, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> +1
> (With minor reservations)
And this is my +1 (also with minor reservations).
All Maven artifacts are reproducible,
The source archive has been also attached to `log4j-transform-bom`. It
can have reproducibility problems if computed on a no
s` and
`l-l-transform`.
-- Forwarded message -
From: Ralph Goers
Date: Fri, May 5, 2023 at 6:17 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] (RC3) Release Apache Log4j Transformation Tools 0.1.0
To:
OK, thanks for the clarification. I do have a strong opinion. Infra made it
clear that rel/ is for taggi
--- Forwarded message -
> From: Ralph Goers
> Date: Fri, May 5, 2023 at 6:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] (RC3) Release Apache Log4j Transformation Tools 0.1.0
> To:
>
>
> OK, thanks for the clarification. I do have a strong opinion. Infra made it
> clear that rel
ons stated so far:
>> 1. Not polluting the tag-space
>> 2. Immutable references to release commits
>>
>> Unless you have objections, I will implement this for `l-l-tools` and
>> `l-l-transform`.
>>
>> ------ Forwarded message -
>> From: Ra
Hi Volkan,
On Fri, 5 May 2023 at 10:47, Volkan Yazıcı wrote:
> Yet I get the team's sentiment on provenance and I agree with it. Yet the
> RC (release candidates) case is a bit muddy. I propose the following: For
> voting purposes, only share the commit ID, and only create a `rel/x.y.z`
> tag if
Hey Piotr,
> release deployment should **not** be triggered by a push. I should
> be a `workflow_dispatch` triggered manually with parameters (e.g. the
> release number). I almost triggered RC4 when merging `release/0.1.0`
> with `main`,
Assuming that, as agreed, RC tags won't be generated by CI
17 matches
Mail list logo
