Re: Git release candidate tagging policy? [was: Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating]

On 28 September 2016 at 16:40, Mark Struberg wrote: > But otoh if a project decides to use -RC1..17 it's also fine. > BUT: they pollute their branches and tags and they actually would need to do > a 2nd VOTE afterwards on the .Final release. So it is much more work and

[RESULT][VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

And here is my +1 So we have 3 +1 bindings (Justin, JB, me) and 1 +1 non binding (Stian) and no other votes so the release passes. Thanks to all who had a look. Will continue with the release steps. Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog

Re: Git release candidate tagging policy? [was: Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Ate Douma wrote: > Hi Mark, > > On 2016-09-26 17:22, Mark Struberg wrote: >> >> Stian, this is established practice in the ASF since the very early days >> of playing with GIT. >> It is used e.g. in the following TLPs: >> TomEE >> DeltaSpike >>

Re: Git release candidate tagging policy? [was: Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating]

Hi Jochen! The discussion was about whether a local release build (GIT runs locally and a 'commit' doesn't push to the canonical ASF repo) should immediately get pushed to the ASF repo or just to a PMC owned 'other' GIT repo (e.g. on github). In various projects we prefer pushing to github

Re: Git release candidate tagging policy? [was: Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Ate Douma wrote: >> Stian, this is established practice in the ASF since the very early days Could someone please enlighten me, what "this" is about? Thanks, Jochen -- The next time you hear: "Don't reinvent the wheel!"

Re: Git release candidate tagging policy? [was: Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating]

Hi Ate! Note that the proposed handling is only a 'best practice' tip. It is _not_ mandated. No need to veto the release just because they do it different. If a project does -RCx then it's legally also fine for the ASF. It is just much more work and possibly confusing to users (which browse

Re: Git release candidate tagging policy? [was: Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating]

Hi Mark, On 2016-09-27 09:44, Mark Struberg wrote: Hi Ate! It's quite natural that many other projects just point to DeltaSpike. DS was in 2011 amongst the very first projects using GIT at the ASF. One of the results of this effort (together with the CouchDB community) was following document

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

OpenJDK 1.8.0 from Ubuntu 16.04. Java version: 1.8.0_91, vendor: Oracle Corporation It seems it was a threading issue as I was using the optimistic -T1.0C - which of course is not required to work. My fault! The build works now (but of course takes a bit longer :). [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS My vote

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

That's weird. Which Java version do you exactly use? I did run the full build with java7 and it passed perfectly fine. LieGrue, strub On Tuesday, 27 September 2016, 12:24, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: >-0 (non-binding) -- changes my previous -1 vote after dist/ was

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

-0 (non-binding) -- changes my previous -1 vote after dist/ was populated. I'm afraid it's not positive vote from me as the unit tests were failing the build, otherwise I would say +1. But feel free to ignore this vote :) -1 .md5 .sha1 missing from dist +1 valid .asc signature -1 KEYS file

Re: Git release candidate tagging policy? [was: Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating]

PS: back then I also summed up information about the difference between SVN and GIT regarding handling from a user pov http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/SVNvsGIT Most of it is nowadays common knowledge I hope, but some might still find it useful. LieGrue, strub > On Tuesday, 27 September

Re: Git release candidate tagging policy? [was: Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating]

Hi Ate! It's quite natural that many other projects just point to DeltaSpike. DS was in 2011 amongst the very first projects using GIT at the ASF. One of the results of this effort (together with the CouchDB community) was following document http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Git_At_Apache_Guide

Git release candidate tagging policy? [was: Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating]

Hi Mark, On 2016-09-26 17:22, Mark Struberg wrote: Stian, this is established practice in the ASF since the very early days of playing with GIT. It is used e.g. in the following TLPs: TomEE DeltaSpike Johnzon CouchDB Maven and many, many more! It also got discussed on members, infra and even

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

added asc (thanks to have caught that!) Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Wordpress Blog | Github | LinkedIn

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

+ md5 and sha1 LieGrue, strub PS: thanks for the review again! > On Monday, 26 September 2016, 18:43, John D. Ament > wrote: > > Can you include the .asc file? > > John > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:32 PM Romain Manni-Bucau > > wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Was about to suggest the same. Add them all and remove the old after some time. Just to get it propagated to the archives. Btw: I've also added a LICENSE and NOTICE to our root in GIT. Please note that both files *are* available in the source release. So again: txs for bringing it up, as it

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Can you include the .asc file? John On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:32 PM Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > added batchee source zip there > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/batchee/0.4-incubating/ > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

added batchee source zip there https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/batchee/0.4-incubating/ Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Wordpress Blog | Github

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

creating dist/dev, please be patient a moment Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Wordpress Blog | Github | LinkedIn

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

2016-09-26 17:56 GMT+02:00 Stian Soiland-Reyes : > On 26 September 2016 at 16:45, Mark Struberg > wrote: > > Again the question is not about our own repo. The problem are the dozen > downstream repos. You cannot delete it from there once it got pulled

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

I think it's sufficient if you push to dist for the 0.4 release under vote here. If you want to add the older versions to archive.apache.org then you can add them to dist and then remove them again after 24h. On 26 September 2016 at 16:52, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

On 26 September 2016 at 16:45, Mark Struberg wrote: > Again the question is not about our own repo. The problem are the dozen > downstream repos. You cannot delete it from there once it got pulled > downstream. Or is there now a way to prevent downstream replication?

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Think you lost me a bit :s so here where we started the fork from: http://apache-incubator-general.996316.n3.nabble.com/Re-DISCUSS-jbatch-impl-Apache-td36529.html About dist: should i push it there now or is that a todo for next release? Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

I didn't want to start a git tag best practices war :) I think we agree that as long as a commit ID is in the email, and/or the hash of the source distribution, then we know what we're voting on and their location is not so important. If you want to skip those, then my opinion is that the

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

> This is incorrect. Infra specifically maintains protected and unprotected > branches. Unprotected branches can be deleted and get sync'd on next push. Again the question is not about our own repo. The problem are the dozen downstream repos. You cannot delete it from there once it got

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

This is a valid point for the older releases. We obviously missed that in our steps. And we also need to add a download page. But that doesn't invalidate this very release. Note that we must not push the release to dist until the vote succeeded. The releases are btw also on

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:23 AM Mark Struberg wrote: > Stian, this is established practice in the ASF since the very early days > of playing with GIT. > It is used e.g. in the following TLPs: > TomEE > DeltaSpike > Johnzon > CouchDB > Maven > and many, many more! > >

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Stian, this is established practice in the ASF since the very early days of playing with GIT. It is used e.g. in the following TLPs: TomEE DeltaSpike Johnzon CouchDB Maven and many, many more! It also got discussed on members, infra and even board lists. The nice thing about GIT is that it

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

On 9/26/16, 1:53 AM, "Mark Struberg" wrote: > >No, we didn't get an official grant, but the RI is ALv2 and we actively >asked the IBM devs/managers and they are perfectly fine with it. AIUI, IBM could give you or one of their employees who participate in your

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

I am a bit concerned about BatchEE's release procedure. Your vote refers to a KEYS file from a different project (tomee) This would be the fourth BatchEE incubator release - so I'm expecting to find a batchee 0.1-incubating, 0.2-incubating and 0.3-incubating somewhere. Where are the source

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

On 26 September 2016 at 14:34, Mark Struberg wrote: > We *never* push commits for in-progress votes to hte ASF repos when we use > GIT! > The reason is that we cannot get rid of those afterwards! Of course we can > delete the branch/tag/commit from the ASF repo, but

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Hi Stian! We *never* push commits for in-progress votes to hte ASF repos when we use GIT! The reason is that we cannot get rid of those afterwards! Of course we can delete the branch/tag/commit from the ASF repo, but we cannot delete them from all the hundreds downstream repos which almost

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

2016-09-26 15:20 GMT+02:00 Stian Soiland-Reyes : > On 26 September 2016 at 07:28, Romain Manni-Bucau > wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > batchee community voted the 0.4-incubating good to release, here is the > > time for general@ to vote on it as well > > -1

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

On 26 September 2016 at 07:28, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Hi guys, > > batchee community voted the 0.4-incubating good to release, here is the > time for general@ to vote on it as well -1 (non-binding) Your vote email didn't include any hashes or commit IDs - please

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

+1 (binding) Checked: - build - NOTICE and DISCLAIMERS - ASF headers - LICENSE should be cleaned up but nothing blocker IMHO Regards JB On 09/26/2016 08:28 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: Hi guys, batchee community voted the 0.4-incubating good to release, here is the time for general@ to vote

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Hi, Changing my vote to +1 binding. Thanks, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Hi, > yes there https://github.com/WASdev/standards.jsr352.jbatch . I think we > are good - at least we were when imported the code. Yuck a malformed NOTICE that looks to include things that are most likley not bundled and lists ALv2 things. You may want to help them out with that. But there’s

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

2016-09-26 11:31 GMT+02:00 Justin Mclean : > Hi, > > > Comes from OpenEJB for cli - thought it was ok to rely on transitive > > dependencies there - and for the maven plugin it is JUNG (BSD) so think > it > > is ok, did I miss one? > > I think so but it not clear to me

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

2016-09-26 11:27 GMT+02:00 Justin Mclean : > Hi, > > > No, we didn't get an official grant, but the RI is ALv2 and we actively > asked the IBM devs/managers and they are perfectly fine with it. They even > give feedback on JIRA and contributed patches later on. > > > >

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Hi, > Comes from OpenEJB for cli - thought it was ok to rely on transitive > dependencies there - and for the maven plugin it is JUNG (BSD) so think it > is ok, did I miss one? I think so but it not clear to me when those LICENSES end up. MPL and CDDL (known at category B) are not OK in source

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Hi, > No, we didn't get an official grant, but the RI is ALv2 and we actively asked > the IBM devs/managers and they are perfectly fine with it. They even give > feedback on JIRA and contributed patches later on. > > We are actively working together so to say. > But by not having a grant we

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

2016-09-26 10:21 GMT+02:00 Justin Mclean : > Hi, > > +0 until IBM copyright question sorted. Happy to change to +1 if there’s a > good reason for it. > > I’d guess that the code come from them in a software grant and the > copyright has just been forgotten to be removed

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Hi Justin! First, thanks for the review! The question got asked as well while we started incubation. I'll try to quickly sum up the outcome: No, we didn't get an official grant, but the RI is ALv2 and we actively asked the IBM devs/managers and they are perfectly fine with it. They even give

Re: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Hi, +0 until IBM copyright question sorted. Happy to change to +1 if there’s a good reason for it. I’d guess that the code come from them in a software grant and the copyright has just been forgotten to be removed and IBM added to the NOTICE file? I checked: - inculcating in name - signature

[VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Hi guys, batchee community voted the 0.4-incubating good to release, here is the time for general@ to vote on it as well dev@ result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/batchee-dev/201609.mbox/browser Here is the release note: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.

Fwd: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Date: 2016-09-22 18:16 GMT+02:00 Subject: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating To: "d...@batchee.incubator.apache.org" <d...@batchee.incubator.apache.org> Hi guys, we discussed it several time so here it is: the vote for batchee N+1 Here is the release note: https://issues.apac