This vote has passed. Thanks to all who voted!
I’ll start publishing stuff now.
--
Steve
www.lucidworks.com
> On May 27, 2016, at 3:02 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> SUCCESS! [1:10:04.644047]
>
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Steve Rowe wrote:
> Please vote for release c
+1
SUCCESS! [1:10:04.644047]
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Steve Rowe wrote:
> Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene/Solr 6.0.1. (I found a
> couple problems in CHANGES after I committed RC1 to Subversion, so I didn’t
> call the vote, and cut RC2 instead.)
>
> The artifacts can be
+1 SUCCESS! [0:55:13.784752]
Le jeu. 26 mai 2016 à 08:49, Tomás Fernández Löbbe
a écrit :
> +1
> SUCCESS! [1:13:52.067157]
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Michael McCandless <
> luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Steve.
>>
>> Mike McCandless
>>
>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>
+1
SUCCESS! [1:13:52.067157]
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
> Thanks Steve.
>
> Mike McCandless
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Steve Rowe wrote:
>
>>
>> > On May 25, 2016, at 11:27 AM, David Smiley
Thanks Steve.
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Steve Rowe wrote:
>
> > On May 25, 2016, at 11:27 AM, David Smiley
> wrote:
> >
> > The problem I had was that I was on branch_6x not the release branch. I
> thought it'd be good enough but apparent
> On May 25, 2016, at 11:27 AM, David Smiley wrote:
>
> The problem I had was that I was on branch_6x not the release branch. I
> thought it'd be good enough but apparently not.
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:13 AM Steve Rowe wrote:
>
>> On May 25, 2016, at 8:46 AM, Michael McCandless
>> w
Il giorno mer 25 mag 2016 alle ore 15:12 Steve Rowe ha
scritto:
> Hi Tommaso,
>
> You and Anshum are getting that warning because you don’t trust me - or
> rather: neither you nor anybody you trust has signed my code signing key.
>
> Yesterday Anshum and I signed each other’s code signing keys an
+1
-Yonik
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:13 AM, Steve Rowe wrote:
> Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene/Solr 6.0.1. (I found a couple
> problems in CHANGES after I committed RC1 to Subversion, so I didn’t call the
> vote, and cut RC2 instead.)
>
> The artifacts can be downloaded from:
+1
SUCCESS! [0:49:14.757238]
The problem I had was that I was on branch_6x not the release branch. I
thought it'd be good enough but apparently not.
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:13 AM Steve Rowe wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> I think this is a result of the JDK naming stuff that Uwe has been working
> o
Hi David,
I think this is a result of the JDK naming stuff that Uwe has been working on
(e.g. 1.8->8) to enable JDK9 usage - but AFAIK that’s not on branch_6_0:
> On May 25, 2016, at 12:48 AM, David Smiley wrote:
> [...]
> RuntimeError: JAR file
> "/private/tmp/smoke_lucene_6.0.1_c7510a0fdd93
Hi Tommaso,
You and Anshum are getting that warning because you don’t trust me - or rather:
neither you nor anybody you trust has signed my code signing key.
Yesterday Anshum and I signed each other’s code signing keys and uploaded them,
and I’m willing to do that with others.
--
Steve
www.luc
David did you use master's smoke tester?
You must use the version on 6.0.x.
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 12:48 AM, David Smiley
wrote:
> I tried to run the smoke tester directly on my machine and it failed right
> after unpacking. Given other's succe
+1
SUCCESS! [1:00:26.085469]
On Wednesday, May 25, 2016 11:27 AM, Tommaso Teofili
wrote:
got the same warning on the GPG key signature but could not reproduce David's
issue, not sure what it could be though. I'd say if no one else can reproduce
it let's go ahead with the release.
+1 on
got the same warning on the GPG key signature but could not reproduce
David's issue, not sure what it could be though. I'd say if no one else can
reproduce it let's go ahead with the release.
+1 on my side.
SUCCESS! [1:19:14.997834]
Regards,
Tommaso
Il giorno mer 25 mag 2016 alle ore 06:48 David
I tried to run the smoke tester directly on my machine and it failed right
after unpacking. Given other's success, it must be user error. What might
the problem be?
unpack lucene-6.0.1.tgz...
verify JAR metadata/identity/no javax.* or java.* classes...
Traceback (most recent call last):
Thanks for doing the release, Steve. All looks good to me but I think you
should get someone to sign you GPG key :)
I see this warning while running the tests: GPG: gpg: WARNING: This key is
not certified with a trusted signature!
Here's my +1!
SUCCESS! [1:05:50.755245]
On Tue, May 24, 2016 a
+1
SUCCESS! [0:31:57.451386]
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:13 AM, Steve Rowe wrote:
> Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene/Solr 6.0.1. (I found a
> couple problems in CHANGES after I committed RC1 to Subversion, so I didn’t
> call the vot
Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene/Solr 6.0.1. (I found a couple
problems in CHANGES after I committed RC1 to Subversion, so I didn’t call the
vote, and cut RC2 instead.)
The artifacts can be downloaded from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-6.0.1-RC2-revc7
18 matches
Mail list logo