Re: River 3.0.1 Release candidate

+1 I have reviewed this release. Bryan On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 1:11 AM, Peter <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: > Don't forget the release artifacts and signatures for the release candidate > are > available at: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/river/ > > When we have en

River 3.0.1 Release candidate

Don't forget the release artifacts and signatures for the release candidate are available at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/river/ When we have enough people to review we can vote & release. This is a bugfix release that addresses https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER

Appeal for another volunteer to review next release

River people, we need one more person who's willing to review River's latest release. Any volunteers? Regards, Peter.

Re: [RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.1

Hi Bryan, Yes, river dev is very quiet, I'm sure there are people here willing to review a release, they're probably just tied up elsewhere, haven't noticed etc, when we can get the required three people to volunteer to review the release, I'll put up another vote. I'm hoping this result

Re: [RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.1

Peter, i have been on vacation but this seems like a shorter than normal revirw period. Was it just a week? Bryan On Jun 19, 2017 12:04 AM, "Peter" <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: > The release failed to pass during the voting period. > > Regards, > > Peter. > >

[RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.1

The release failed to pass during the voting period. Regards, Peter. On 11/06/2017 11:11 AM, Peter wrote: River 3.0.1 is the latest release of Apache River. The release artifacts and signatures for the release candidate are available at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/river

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.1

Exciting! I will try and dig out a bit and download the candidate release. Bryan On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Peter <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: > River 3.0.1 is the latest release of Apache River. > > The release artifacts and signatures for the release candidate are > ava

[VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.1

River 3.0.1 is the latest release of Apache River. The release artifacts and signatures for the release candidate are available at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/river/ [ ] +1: I vote in favour of this release. [ ] +0: I am not against this release. [ ] -1: I am against

River 3.0.1 release

Anyone got some cycles to help out with the River 3.0.1 release? There are some existing jira issues with patches or easy fixes we can include too. I've also got a Jini compatibility library to assist people who want to migrate from pre 3.x versions that depend on common classes in the comsun

Re: new release question

On 27/12/2016 12:10 AM, Zsolt Kúti wrote: Hi Peter, What is the current status of the 3.0 release? Released 2 months ago, but not officially announced. What is its relation to your github river-internet project? The github code is forked off river trunk, just before the Ivy dependency

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.0

:01 pm To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.0 The question is of course where to next? As people are aware I've been working on addressing security issues and  how to make River better and more secure.  I've been working on this  outside the project because my at

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.0

The question is of course where to next? As people are aware I've been working on addressing security issues and how to make River better and more secure. I've been working on this outside the project because my attempts to discuss it caused heated arguments. I figured that if I could

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.0

Excellent. A great step. Bryan On Wednesday, October 5, 2016, Peter Firmstone wrote: > Results: > > 3 binding votes > 1 non binding > > None against. > > The artifacts have been published, we need to wait 24 hours before > announcing. > > Regards, > > Peter. > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.0

Thanks Patricia. +1 Peter. That's 3 binding pmc votes! Sent from my Samsung device.     Include original message Original message From: Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> Sent: 21/09/2016 10:34:46 am To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.0 +1 B

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.0

+1 Binding. On 9/2/2016 6:18 PM, Peter wrote: River 3.0.0 is the latest release of Apache River. The release artifacts and signatures for the release candidate are available at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/river/ [ ] +1: I vote in favour of this release. [ ] +0: I am not against

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.0

+1: I vote in favor of this release. (binding) Great job! Bryan On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Peter <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: > River 3.0.0 is the latest release of Apache River. > > The release artifacts and signatures for the release candidate are > available at: > ht

Re: release artifacts

build and test the release, it won't be enough to make it an official Apache release. We will need a third PMC member who is active enough to do it. On 9/1/2016 6:31 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: How many PMC members are ready and willing to build and test, so that they can upvote the release? Pete

RE: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.0

+1 and great news for River communities.RegardsBishnu Bishnu Prasad Gautam > Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 11:18:21 +1000 > From: j...@zeus.net.au > To: dev@river.apache.org > Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.0 > > River 3.0.0 is the latest release of Apache River. > &g

[VOTE] Release Apache River 3.0.0

River 3.0.0 is the latest release of Apache River. The release artifacts and signatures for the release candidate are available at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/river/ [ ] +1: I vote in favour of this release. [ ] +0: I am not against this release. [ ] -1: I am against this release

Re: release artifacts

  Ah, yes, the binary release was disabled with the ivy work, due to external dependencies. In any case the additional work would only delay release. And here I was testing everything to make sure the classdep build bug hadn't dropped any classes from jar files. So this release will only

Re: release artifacts

The release artifacts contain source code, the binaries are there for user convenience.   I could use the new X500 Certificate to sign the jars, this was purchased by the Apache Foundation for this purpose. Regards, Peter. Sent from my Samsung device.     Include original message

Re: release artifacts

My reason for asking this is to make sure there are at least three of us. If Peter and I both build and test the release, it won't be enough to make it an official Apache release. We will need a third PMC member who is active enough to do it. On 9/1/2016 6:31 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: How

Re: release artifacts

How many PMC members are ready and willing to build and test, so that they can upvote the release? Peter: Why jar files in the release? Isn't it supposed to be source code? On 9/1/2016 4:57 AM, Peter Firmstone wrote: Getting another set of release artifacts 4 River3 ready and have run all

release artifacts

Getting another set of release artifacts 4 River3 ready and have run all tests again, need to generate pgp signatures on weekend. Decided not to use X500 release cert to sign jar files this release to prevent holding up progress, since I haven't worked out how others can verify release

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

Ok, build issue fix committed, someone wants to spin another release. I had hoped to have a pre release period to deal with any new bugs, unfortunately that wasn't a good fit with Apache policy, if we can make a beta release, then I'm happy with that. imunit, allows you to control when

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

Ok, I hadn't realised it was that critical. In that case, since I hadn't yet posted a binding vote. +0 Binding. Regards, Peter. On 5/03/2016 9:15 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: The build bug is absolutely critical for the Apache release policy: "Before voting +1 PMC members are req

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

quickly. This is actually a bugfix release, it's just so many bugs got fixed that people are frightened of breakages. The comments on RIVER-431 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-431> are really worth looking at too, there are 241 more bugs reported by Findbugs in River 2.2.1 than

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

ct: Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0 Changing my vote to +0 for the moment. OK, so what we have here is a build bug. If you do an ‘ant clean’ then ‘ant river-runtime’, all is good. Do ‘ant river-runtime’ again, you get the failure that Patricia is seeing. If you ‘cd qa’ t

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

My feeling is that there should be some way to document that it is not a real release, keep it as a development download for testing only, but make more users aware of it on those terms. Can we e.g. put "beta" in its name? What do other people think? On 3/4/2016 7:57 AM, Greg Tr

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

run-categories’ to run the test suite, so I didn’t see this build bug. On the one hand, I’m inclined to cancel the vote, figure out the bug, and spin a new release. That could potentially take a while, because the bug smells of a nasty circularity in the build (or it could be trivial

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

Ubuntu. Unfortunately, I cannot cast a binding vote for a release I cannot run. On 3/3/2016 6:20 AM, Greg Trasuk wrote: Try running just ‘ant’ before you do ‘ant qa.run’. That should run the default build target. It appears that ‘qa.run’ is skipping the step where it downloads the external dependencies.

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

2016 04:20 PM, Peter wrote: >> ant qa.run >> ant test >> >> Regards, >> >> Peter. >> >> Sent from my Samsung device. >> Include original message >> Original message >> From: Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> >&

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

evice. Include original message Original message From: Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> Sent: 03/03/2016 09:44:57 am To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0 I have built from the release artifacts, on a Ubuntu box. What is the simplest

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

ant qa.run ant test Regards, Peter. Sent from my Samsung device.     Include original message Original message From: Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> Sent: 03/03/2016 09:44:57 am To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0 I have buil

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

‘ant qa.run’ will run the complete integration test suite. Be warned, though, it takes about 22 hours. Probably more salient, since this is a “technology preview” release, is to run ‘rat’ against it, and check the licensing. You could also verify the md5, sha and pgp signatures

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

I have built from the release artifacts, on a Ubuntu box. What is the simplest way of running some tests against my build result? On 3/2/2016 2:25 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: I have just got done with another project that was my highest priority for a couple of weeks. I'll attempt to build

Re: Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

I'll try and take a look at them over the weekend, I can make no promises though. On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 8:12 PM, Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: > Hi folks - we’re still short one binding vote for this release. So, if > you can, please have a look at the artifacts and h

Reminder: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

Hi folks - we’re still short one binding vote for this release. So, if you can, please have a look at the artifacts and have your say.. Cheers, Greg Trasuk > On Feb 23, 2016, at 3:43 PM, Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: > > Hello all: > > Release candidate a

Re: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

+1 : I am in favor of this release. Bryan Thompson Chief Scientist & Founder Blazegraph e: br...@blazegraph.com w: http://blazegraph.com Blazegraph products help to solve the Graph Cache Thrash to achieve large scale processing for graph and predictive analytics. Blazegraph is the cre

Re: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

com> Sent: 24/02/2016 06:43:47 am To: dev@river.apache.org Cc: u...@river.apache.org Subject: [Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0 Hello all: Release candidate artifacts can be found at  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/river/ Binary release artifacts are staged in 

[Vote] Release Apache River JTSK 3.0.0

Hello all: Release candidate artifacts can be found at https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/river/ Binary release artifacts are staged in https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheriver-1003/ The vote will remain open for at least 72 hours (Ending no sooner than 2100UTC

Re: Reminder - [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

Thanks Greg, Trunk is ready to go if you want to spin a release. Cheers, Peter. Sent from my Samsung device.     Include original message Original message From: Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> Sent: 22/02/2016 02:16:28 am To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: Reminder -

Re: Reminder - [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

Hi Peter: If the trunk is ready to go, I can spin the release - I’m already familiar with the process. Just let me know. Greg. > On Feb 20, 2016, at 4:05 AM, Peter <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: > > +1 Peter. > > Will see if I can create some release artifacts for 3 tomorr

[Result] Release Apache River 2.2.3

Final Results are: 3 Binding ‘+1’s: Greg Trasuk, Bryan Thompson, Peter Firmstone 3 Non-Binding '+1’s: Patricia Shanahan, Zsolt Kuti, Tom Hobbs So, the vote carries. I’ll move the artifacts into the release area and update the web pages. Cheers, Greg Trasuk

Re: Reminder - [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

+1 (non-binding) Sorry, I just don't have the time to download and verify any of the artefacts. On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Peter <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: > +1 Peter. > > Will see if I can create some release artifacts for 3 tomorrow. > > > Sent from my Samsu

Re: Reminder - [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

+1 Peter. Will see if I can create some release artifacts for 3 tomorrow. Sent from my Samsung device.     Include original message Original message From: Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> Sent: 18/02/2016 01:57:32 pm To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: Reminder - [Vote] R

Re: Reminder - [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

I appreciate the effort. I have to confess I’m getting nervous about River’s ability to make a release. Ideally we’d have a few more PMC members show up to vote. In theory there are 14 of us. Cheers, Greg Trasuk > On Feb 17, 2016, at 6:03 PM, Peter <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: &g

Re: Reminder - [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

<tras...@stratuscom.com> Cc: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: Reminder - [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3 Hi all: This vote has been open for over a week at this point, and so far we have only  two binding votes (Patricia asked me to treat her vote as non-binding as she  hasn’t reviewed

Re: Reminder - [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

Hi all: This vote has been open for over a week at this point, and so far we have only two binding votes (Patricia asked me to treat her vote as non-binding as she hasn’t reviewed the release in detail). Could those PMC members on the list please have a look and vote, if you haven’t yet

Reminder - [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 5:02 PM, Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: > > Hello all: > > River 2.2.3 is the latest release of the Apache River Jini Technology Starter > Kit. It is a maintenance release that removes the Activation subsystem and > JRMP support.

Re: Reminder - [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

+1: I vote in favor of this release. Bryan Thompson Chief Scientist & Founder Blazegraph 4501 Tower Road Greensboro, NC 27410 br...@blazegraph.com http://blazegraph.com http://blog.blazegraph.com Blazegraph™ <http://www.blazegraph.com/> is our ultra high-performance grap

Re: Reminder - [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

+1 for this release On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: > > > On Feb 8, 2016, at 5:02 PM, Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: > > > > Hello all: > > > > River 2.2.3 is the latest release of t

Re: [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

As its just a maintenance release, 7 days seems a little long. Let’s just leave it at ‘at least til Thurs’ and we can leave it open as long as it takes to get 3 ‘+1’s. I think it would make sense to finish off this vote before we open the voting on ‘3.0’, but that’s up to whoever is acting

Re: [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

nt: 09/02/2016 10:49:11 am To: dev@river.apache.org Cc: u...@river.apache.org Subject: Re: [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3 +1 from me. Greg Trasuk > On Feb 8, 2016, at 5:02 PM, Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: >  > Hello all: >  > River 2.2.3 is the latest 

[Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

Hello all: River 2.2.3 is the latest release of the Apache River Jini Technology Starter Kit. It is a maintenance release that removes the Activation subsystem and JRMP support. The release artifacts and signatures for the release candidate are available at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist

Re: [Vote] Release Apache River 2.2.3

+1 from me. Greg Trasuk > On Feb 8, 2016, at 5:02 PM, Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: > > Hello all: > > River 2.2.3 is the latest release of the Apache River Jini Technology Starter > Kit. It is a maintenance release that removes the Activation subsy

Couple of minor roadblocks to the 3.0 release

the signature verification and the affected unit tests for now, so as not to delay the release. As I said, the signature issue is probably an Ivy configuration thing. The imunit issue is more of a problem. What I propose to do is contact the authors and see if they’re able to put it up on Maven

Re: Release vote procedure

hoping it'll open your mind to investigation. Regards, Peter. Sent from my Samsung device.     Include original message Original message From: Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> Sent: 10/01/2016 06:11:42 am To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: Release vote procedure 72

Re: Release vote procedure

What I actually meant (sorry for not writing precisely) is why not call the 72-hour vote now and release it? Cheers, Greg. > On Jan 9, 2016, at 12:39 PM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: > > Now that we have a release candidate (YEAH!), we need to sort out how >

Re: Release vote procedure

Remember that a PMC member voting +1 is asserting that they have personally downloaded, built, and tested the release candidate, as well as reviewing its licensing. Do we have three PMC members who can do that within 72 hours? Anybody who would vote -1 on that schedule? (I do not expect

Re: Release vote procedure

72 hours is a guideline. I think it’s reasonable - that’s what most projects use. But if you think it’s not enough in this case, make it 5 days or 7 days. Whatever. Doesn’t take that long to run the rat reports and see if it builds. The “tested the release candidate” is probably what you’re

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

NOTICE file for the binary convenience artifacts. - ‘doap-river.rdf’ is not really specific to the 3.0.0 release, so it shouldn’t be in the release artifact. - ‘build.properties’ doesn’t have a license header. - I’d remove the ‘nbproject’ folder myself - the project shouldn’t be dependent on t

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

To: dev@river.apache.org Reply To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate Greg, If you want to remedy these issues for me, I can regenerate the release artifacts. Sent from my Samsung device.     Include original message Original message From: Greg Trasuk <t

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

message Original message From: Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> Sent: 10/01/2016 06:26:05 am To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate I am looking forward to a very open strategy discussion once we get 3.0  done. I hope everyone will focus 

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

Thanks Greg, much appreciated. Sent from my Samsung device.     Include original message Original message From: tras...@stratuscom.com Sent: 10/01/2016 08:57:18 am To: Peter <dev@river.apache.org>; dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate Happy t

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

Sorry for this ending up on the list, it was intended to be private discussion, I thought I had edited the To: list appropriately. Greg, I am not saying that you should not review the release candidate. This ended up being a reply in this thread when it should not of. I want and value your

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

I tend to agree, unfortunately we're not allowed to release anything externally until after the release artifacts have been voted on. On 10/01/2016 12:56 PM, Dan Rollo wrote: Do we have a process for staging the river artifacts in the maven central staging repo? And/or where do the related

Re: Release 3.0, package rename and ServiceProxyAccessor

On 06-01-16 18:49, Simon IJskes - QCG wrote: On 06-01-16 13:38, Peter wrote: Your security analysis is too narrow, your thinking like a user, not an attacker. An attacker is not going to send you a proxy to load into a standalone Classloader. She has the choice of the entire classpath, not

Re: Release 3.0, package rename and ServiceProxyAccessor

On 06-01-16 13:38, Peter wrote: Your security analysis is too narrow, your thinking like a user, not an attacker. An attacker is not going to send you a proxy to load into a standalone Classloader. She has the choice of the entire classpath, not you and not River, that's right it's the

Re: Release 3.0, package rename and ServiceProxyAccessor

to net.jini.export. > > Seeing as we're about to change the package of ServiceProxyAccessor in the > 3.0 release, it would have less impact on downstream code if this change was > only made once. > > If the security and performance improvements were not accepted, (I'm quite

Re: Release 3.0, package rename and ServiceProxyAccessor

> On Jan 5, 2016, at 10:51 PM, Peter wrote: > > > > ProxyPreparer in its current form is broken. > > Proxy preparation assumed that both the java sandbox and serialization are > secure, code is downloaded, static class initialisers and readObject methods > are executed

Release 3.0, package rename and ServiceProxyAccessor

about to change the package of ServiceProxyAccessor in the 3.0 release, it would have less impact on downstream code if this change was only made once. If the security and performance improvements were not accepted, (I'm quite confident that we will agree on a solution once the benefits can

Re: x509 certificates for jarsigner to sign maven repos release jar file artifacts

, but the 2.2. branch is probably more up-to-date), you’ll see ‘roll-release.sh’ which generates the signatures on the release artifacts, and ‘poms/deploy_river.groovy’, which uses Maven to deploy signed artifacts to the Apache staging repository, from which we eventually release to Maven Central

Re: x509 certificates for jarsigner to sign maven repos release jar file artifacts

o sign maven repos release jar file artifacts (Pulling this over to river-dev, since it’s not really a members@ question -  please reply there) Peter: I don’t recall seeing any requests for signed jars - could you refresh my  memory? For downloadable jars, that’s what the md5 mechanism is fo

Re: committer keys for release

.     Include original message Original message From: Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> Sent: 22/12/2015 02:37:31 pm To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: committer keys for release I do not currently have keys, and this is not a good time to try to get  a key into the web of tru

River 3.0 release

if it was included with an implementation in River 3.1, perhaps as a java 8 default method in ServiceRegistrar for compatibility reasons (doesn't require an additional interface). For now unless there's any disagreement I'll remove them before releasing. This will be our best release yet

committer keys for release

Committers who have contributed to River, please append your pgp public key to the KEYS file in the trunk directory in preparation for release. Thank you, Peter.   Sent from my Samsung device.  

Re: committer keys for release

I do not currently have keys, and this is not a good time to try to get a key into the web of trust. My understanding is that keys from people other than the release manager are optional. On 12/21/2015 7:29 PM, Peter Firmstone wrote: Committers who have contributed to River, please append

Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed

00:10 am To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed Note that this is not quite a release candidate. I'm working on fixing some missing license statements in scripts and configuration files. I am also working on getting together a build environment, having

Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed

: Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> Sent: 11/12/2015 10:06:05 am To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed I have some config files modified. Would you like me to check files in  batch-by-batch, or wait until I have a lot of them done? I got a "Je

Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed

, Peter. Sent from my Samsung device.   Include original message Original message From: Peter <j...@zeus.net.au> Sent: 11/12/2015 11:04:39 am To: dev@river.apache.org <dev@river.apache.org> Subject: Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed Yes, check them in ba

Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed

; Interested to know how it goes. > > Regards, > > Peter. > > > > > Sent from my Samsung device. > Original message > From: Bryan Thompson <br...@systap.com> > Sent: 09/12/2015 05:38:52 am > To: <dev@river.apache.org> <dev@river.apache.org

Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed

Peter, Brad (Cc) is working to put the River 3 candidate release into CI for our platform. This will allow us to test it in the highly available replication cluster mode of the database. Thanks, Bryan Bryan Thompson Chief Scientist & Founder SYSTAP, LLC 4501 Tower Road Greensboro

Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed

When there’s a release package generated, I’ll review it and hopefully add my ‘+1’. Greg. > On Dec 8, 2015, at 2:29 PM, Peter <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: > > Thanks Patricia, > > We need at least three binding votes for release, at the very least we need > on

Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed

n in error, please notify the sender by reply email and permanently delete all copies of the email and its contents and attachments. On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: > > When there’s a release package generated, I’ll review it and hopefully a

Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed

rg>; Brad Bebee <be...@systap.com> Subject: Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed Peter, Brad (Cc) is working to put the River 3 candidate release into CI for our platform.  This will allow us to test it in the highly available replication cluster mode of the database. Than

Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed

Thanks Greg, much appreciated. Sent from my Samsung device.   Include original message Original message From: Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> Sent: 09/12/2015 05:36:31 am To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: Preparation for Release - one more volunteer needed When t

Preparation for Release

This is probably unnecessary, but I wanted to make sure everyone understands the requirements for casting binding votes in favor of a release. See http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy In particular "Before casting +1 binding votes, individuals are REQUIRED to download all signed s

Re: Release 3.0 merge into trunk

For moving to Git, see http://www.apache.org/dev/writable-git Is the support provided sufficient? How do committers in general feel about moving River to Git? If it is a good idea, should we do it before Release 3.0? The alternative might be to rename the current SVN branch and release from

Re: Release 3.0 merge into trunk

just did releases from branches after that. > > What kind of support does Apache offer for switching to git? That might be > easier. > > Thanks, > Bryan > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: > >> I think the next t

Re: Release 3.0 merge into trunk

, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: > I think the next thing we need to do to make Release 3.0 a reality is to > merge it into the trunk. > > If you agree, I would like opinions on the best way to go about it. > Ideally, we will preserve revisio

Re: Release 3.0 merge into trunk

+1 on moving to git. +1 on doing this before a 3.0 release if we want to maintain history from the trunk. Bryan Thompson Chief Scientist & Founder SYSTAP, LLC 4501 Tower Road Greensboro, NC 27410 br...@systap.com http://blazegraph.com http://blog.bigdata.com <http://bigdata.co

Re: Release 3.0 merge into trunk

, JERI, etc into their own repositories/deliverables? Should we have a set of repositories that reflect our release engineering processes? i.e. a development repo, QA repo, release repo, etc? Simply “switching to git” and then having one big canonical git repository that we use exactly

Re: Release 3.0 merge into trunk

One concern I have with moving to Git before Release 3.0 is the tension between really thinking through the Git move and getting 3.0 out quickly. On 9/22/2015 7:23 AM, Greg Trasuk wrote: Apache’s Git support is just fine, and includes the ability to accept pull requests from Github, in a way

Re: Release 3.0 merge into trunk

ame > “jtsk/skunk/qa-refactor-namespace/trunk” to “jtsk/trunk” and release from > there. That’s the path of least bikeshedding. > In agreement with you Greg. I’m all for moving to Git, and as you point out there are questions involved with doing that. Lets not get distracted (love the bi

Re: Release 3.0 merge into trunk

Just to be clear, I agree with Pat here - stay with svn for the initial 3.0 release. If someone’s up for the challenge, try to merge qa-refactor-namespace into trunk. Alternately, just go ahead and replace trunk with qa-refactor-namespace, as I described below. Greg Trasuk > On Sep 22, 2

Release 3.0 - is JIRA being used to plan releases?

Hello, I am trying to understand how the work remaining for releases is being organized, specifically for the 3.0 release. I've looked through JIRA [1] and it does not appear to be very active. It would be nice to have a clear view of what needs to happen to get to a 3.0 release, whether

Re: Release 3.0 - is JIRA being used to plan releases?

So the release is currently blocked on the custard-apple dependency? @peter If so, could we please get this committed into org.apache.river.concurrent? - Deal with custard-apple dependency (either put it into River or publish to Maven Central) Thanks, Bryan Bryan Thompson Chief

Re: Release 3.0 - is JIRA being used to plan releases?

derstand how the work remaining for releases is being > organized, specifically for the 3.0 release. I've looked through JIRA [1] > and it does not appear to be very active. It would be nice to have a clear > view of what needs to happen to get to a 3.0 release, whether in JIRA or a >

Re: Release 3.0

M, Peter wrote: >> On 5/09/2015 1:04 AM, Dennis Reedy wrote: >>> Peter, >>> >>> Recovered missing org.apache.river.test.support.* what is the status of >>> custard-apple artifact? This is a blocker for the release as well. >>> >>> Dennis >&

  1   2   3   4   >