Hi all,
now I'll restart another time the vote for 2.0.3 .
Note that the issue for building Pivot sources with Ant-1.9.x has been
resolved in sources (and already committed) BUT the vote will be done on
the same artifacts of last vote (generating a release is really a time
consuming job), so
Sandro,
I totally agree about voting on the same 2.0.3 artifacts. There is no
reason for you to rebuild everything and other voters to re-test just
because of the Ant or git issues.
Chris
On 23 July 2013 16:43, Sandro Martini sandro.mart...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
now I'll restart another
Hi Chris,
thank you for the help and patience :-) ... making a release is really a
time consuming task, so we can do it soon for 2.0.4 .
This time I'm sure we'll be able to publish the release ... now (after
Roger vote) it's our vote to be needed :-) .
Let's update soon.
Bye
Il giorno
I realise that the last vote did not succeed due to insufficient binding
votes and in particular because I was unable to complete my tests due to
other commitments, so apologies again for that. However I have now finally
found the time to complete testing the 2.0.3 release candidate and am
Hi Chris,
welcome back.
In next days I'll restart another vote, but for usual 2.0.3 artifacts ...
For small issues you find we can resolve them for 2.0.4 and 2.1.0 ... and
for missing test folders when downloading via git I can fix it (it's a good
thing to fix) but remember that ant test should
The vote did NOT passes with 2 binding +1, 1 non-binding +1, and no 0.
See here for more info:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release
Thank you very much to all who participated in this vote !!
--
View this message in context:
testing.
Thanks for your efforts so far,
~Roger
-Original Message-
From: Chris Bartlett [mailto:cbartlet...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 3:01 PM
To: Pivot Dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Pivot 2.0.3 - Round 3
Unfortunately I have not yet finished testing.
When
Hi, didn't find info that it's not possible to extend a vote duration, so
unless objection I'll extend it the next email here (but with a little
different title, to have it more visible) ...
I think Sandro created the release on Linux, so likely the line endings
were \n and not \r\n as they
On 5 June 2013 11:15, Sandro Martini sandro.mart...@gmail.com wrote:
I think Sandro created the release on Linux, so likely the line endings
were \n and not \r\n as they would be in Windows. Also the .jar files
won't be exactly the same due to timestamps, and probably subtle JDK
, that the release build process is not very repeatable,
and I hope to address this in the future.
~Roger
-Original Message-
From: Chris Bartlett [mailto:cbartlet...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 2:04 PM
To: Pivot Dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Pivot 2.0.3 - Round 3
On 5 June 2013 11
, that the release build process is not very repeatable,
and I hope to address this in the future.
~Roger
-Original Message-
From: Chris Bartlett [mailto:cbartlet...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 2:04 PM
To: Pivot Dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Pivot 2.0.3 - Round 3
On 5 June 2013
Roger,
I agree with you, comparing binary artifacts is not so useful because of
course it depends on platform, tools, compression, etc. So on binary I
could suggest to check features by running/using them, open like zip files
and inspect content, etc ... but of course one of powerful things of
Bartlett [mailto:cbartlet...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 2:28 PM
To: Pivot Dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Pivot 2.0.3 - Round 3
Roger,
Your reversed method was to be my final resort but I didn't think it
would really be acceptable as it is a bit of a hack. I certainly wasn't
aware
Unfortunately I have not yet finished testing.
When attempting to recreate the release candidate from SVN source and then
compare the resulting files I am seeing discrepancies which *seem* to just
be down to line endings however I have not yet confirmed this or had time
to correct my environment
fine with extending the vote for another 24 hours in order to complete
your testing.
Thanks for your efforts so far,
~Roger
-Original Message-
From: Chris Bartlett [mailto:cbartlet...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 3:01 PM
To: Pivot Dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Pivot 2.0.3
My vote is:
[+1] Publish
Tests done:
* System is OSX 10.6.8, JDK 1.6.0_45 (x86_64)
* Download all .zip and .tar.gz files, check MD5 checksums.
* Compare contents of .zip files with contents of .tar.gz files and
verified they are identical.
* Run clean, package, doc, test targets on both source
Hi all,
this is my vote:
[x] +1 Publish
Test Platform: Windows 7
Oracle JDK 6 Update 45 (64 bit), and Java Runtime 7 Update 21 (64 bit)
inside Chrome 27 , Firefox 21 , Internet Explorer 9
- review digital sign on all asc files, using PGP / GPG
- review RAT reports
- check correctness of the
Hi All,
If I can vote than I'm for:
[x] +1 Publish
I'm using Pivot 2.0.3 from it's first release candidate each working day
with my desktop applications on Fedora Linux 18 and 19 with Oracle JDK 6
64bit and Open JDK 7 64bit and after fix of problem with ListButtons
everything works
Apologies for my long term absence from the lists project in general.
I have a little more free time at the moment so will try to contribute to
this vote in the next few days.
Chris
On 29 May 2013 00:14, Sandro Martini sandro.mart...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
the Pivot 2.0.3 release
Hi All,
the Pivot 2.0.3 release candidate has been tagged, packaged, and is ready
for a vote.
The artifacts, RAT reports, and KEYS file can be found here:
http://people.apache.org/~smartini/pivot-2.0.3_release/
Note that just for convenience there are even Maven bundles for installing
them in a
20 matches
Mail list logo
