This vote has been open for more than a 72 hours.
We have 4 binding +1s, no 0s and 1 -1s.
Votes were cast by:
Ant Elder (+1)
Matthieu Riou (+1)
Jean Anderson (+1)
Martijn Dashorst (+1)
Kevan Millar (-1)
We will modify the checksum representation for MD5 and SHA1 so that tools can
easier
On Dec 19, 2007 10:52 AM, Michael Baessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...We have 4 binding +1s, no 0s and 1 -1s
I did vote +0 earlier in this thread. Just for the record, as it
doesn'n make much of a difference other than express support ;-)
-Bertrand
We had two additional votes...
Now we have 5 binding +1s, one 0s and one -1s.
Votes were cast by:
Ant Elder (+1)
Matthieu Riou (+1)
Jean Anderson (+1)
Martijn Dashorst (+1)
Paul Fremantle (+1)
Bertrand Delacretaz(+0)
Kevan Millar (-1)
Thanks again for your support!
-- Michael Baessler
Paul
On Dec 17, 2007 5:44 PM, Thilo Goetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kevan Miller wrote:
On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:09 AM, Thilo Goetz wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Marshall Schor wrote:
We've put the LICENSE, NOTICES, and DISCLAIMERs into the top
directory
of the source (and binary)
Kevan
Your interpretation works if your subversion repository is not a
distribution. IMO, it is and should contain appropriate license/
notice/disclaimer.
--kevan
Kevan
The SVN tag is only a distribution if it is published as that. The fact that
SVN is available to anyone via HTTP does
On Dec 18, 2007 10:37 AM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...There clearly is not yet consensus
among the IPMC on this though or if that tag MUST have LICENSE and NOTICE
files in the the top-level directory
...So it is a new requirement and I don't think we should be making up policy
On Dec 18, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 10:37 AM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...So it is a new requirement and I don't think we should be
making up policy
during a release vote
+1, that's even part of the policy! It is just *so* annoying that
this
Leo Simons wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 10:37 AM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...So it is a new requirement and I don't think we should be making
up policy
during a release vote
+1, that's even part of the policy! It is just *so*
For the record, +1 for releasing from me.
Martijn
On Dec 18, 2007 1:16 PM, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 10:37 AM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...So it is a new requirement and I don't think we should be
On Dec 18, 2007 3:11 PM, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For the record, +1 for releasing from me.
+0 from me for now: from discussions here I feel like everything's
fine, but lack the time to check the release files myself ATM.
-Bertrand
On 18/12/2007, Michael Baessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 10:37 AM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...So it is a new requirement and I don't think we should be making
up policy
during a release
sebb wrote:
On 18/12/2007, Michael Baessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 10:37 AM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...So it is a new requirement and I don't think we should be making
up policy
during a
On 18/12/2007, Thilo Goetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 18/12/2007, Michael Baessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 10:37 AM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...So it is a new requirement
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Marshall Schor wrote:
We've put the LICENSE, NOTICES, and DISCLAIMERs into the top directory
of the source (and binary) distribution(s), but didn't realize this also
needs to be in the top level of the SVN tag, because we didn't know that
was considered part of the
sebb wrote:
On 15/12/2007, Jean T. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sebb wrote:
[Eventually found the KEYS file in SVN, but it might be helpful to
provide a pointer in the vote mails]
yeah, I went to their website and followed the link from there.
So did I.
The NOTICE file in
sebb wrote:
[Eventually found the KEYS file in SVN, but it might be helpful to
provide a pointer in the vote mails]
Good point, will do next time.
[...]
There are some problems with the MD5 and SHA1 files.
For example, uimaj-2.2.1-incubating-bin.tar.bz2.md5:
On Dec 17, 2007 10:09 AM, Thilo Goetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Marshall Schor wrote:
We've put the LICENSE, NOTICES, and DISCLAIMERs into the top directory
of the source (and binary) distribution(s), but didn't realize this also
needs to be in the top level of
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Dec 17, 2007 10:09 AM, Thilo Goetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Marshall Schor wrote:
We've put the LICENSE, NOTICES, and DISCLAIMERs into the top directory
of the source (and binary) distribution(s), but didn't realize this also
needs to
On Dec 17, 2007 11:08 AM, Thilo Goetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
...Automated reproducible builds (including building distribution
archives) are IMHO a must in our way of working.
Absolutely. Our build is completely automated and reproducible,
including
On 17/12/2007, Thilo Goetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 15/12/2007, Jean T. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sebb wrote:
[Eventually found the KEYS file in SVN, but it might be helpful to
provide a pointer in the vote mails]
yeah, I went to their website and followed the
On 17/12/2007, Thilo Goetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sebb wrote:
[Eventually found the KEYS file in SVN, but it might be helpful to
provide a pointer in the vote mails]
Good point, will do next time.
[...]
There are some problems with the MD5 and SHA1 files.
For example,
sebb wrote:
[...]
Maven can generate the MD5 and SHA1 checksums itself; no need for a
separate tool.
I'm not familiar with Maven, so I don't know the commands off-hand,
but I can probably find them.
Maybe it can, but I was unable to figure out how.
We need to create checksums for the
On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:09 AM, Thilo Goetz wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Marshall Schor wrote:
We've put the LICENSE, NOTICES, and DISCLAIMERs into the top
directory
of the source (and binary) distribution(s), but didn't realize
this also
needs to be in the top level of the SVN tag,
Kevan Miller wrote:
On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:09 AM, Thilo Goetz wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Marshall Schor wrote:
We've put the LICENSE, NOTICES, and DISCLAIMERs into the top directory
of the source (and binary) distribution(s), but didn't realize this
also
needs to be in the top
Though I don't necessarily agree with Kevan, the best projects to look at
are recently graduated projects as those have been scrutinized by the IPMC,
and have been held against the same (though possibly changing) standards as
you.
For instance you could take a look at Wicket, OpenJPA, ServiceMix,
On 17/12/2007, Thilo Goetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kevan Miller wrote:
On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:09 AM, Thilo Goetz wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Marshall Schor wrote:
We've put the LICENSE, NOTICES, and DISCLAIMERs into the top directory
of the source (and binary)
On Dec 17, 2007 5:49 PM, Kevan Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your interpretation works if your subversion repository is not a
distribution. IMO, it is and should contain appropriate license/
notice/disclaimer.
I don't agree with this standpoint as for instance the LICENSE and
DISCLAIMER
On 17/12/2007, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 17, 2007 5:49 PM, Kevan Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your interpretation works if your subversion repository is not a
distribution. IMO, it is and should contain appropriate license/
notice/disclaimer.
I agree with
sebb wrote:
On 17/12/2007, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 17, 2007 5:49 PM, Kevan Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your interpretation works if your subversion repository is not a
distribution. IMO, it is and should contain appropriate license/
notice/disclaimer.
On Dec 17, 2007 10:17 PM, sebb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Regardless of the outcome, I think that there are problems with
generating the NOTICE and LICENSE files automatically. Unless the
project is pure ASF, there are additional items that may need to be
added to the N L files. In any case,
sebb wrote:
On 15/12/2007, Jean T. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sebb wrote:
The NOTICE file in uimaj-2.2.1-incubating-bin.zip refers to the
contributions from IBM:
Software Grant License Agreement, informally known as the
IBM UIMA License Agreement.
however, that license is not
On Dec 15, 2007 9:21 PM, Kevan Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 15, 2007, at 1:43 PM, sebb wrote:
[Eventually found the KEYS file in SVN, but it might be helpful to
provide a pointer in the vote mails]
The NOTICE file in uimaj-2.2.1-incubating-bin.zip refers to the
I reviewed the rat reports, checked the asc signatures, did a cursory
review of DISCLAIMER, NOTICE, and LICENSE files in a couple of the src
and bin files, and it all looks good to me.
+1
btw, the way you provide the rat reports up front is *very* helpful.
-jean
Michael Baessler wrote:
The
[Eventually found the KEYS file in SVN, but it might be helpful to
provide a pointer in the vote mails]
The NOTICE file in uimaj-2.2.1-incubating-bin.zip refers to the
contributions from IBM:
Software Grant License Agreement, informally known as the
IBM UIMA License Agreement.
however, that
On Dec 15, 2007, at 1:43 PM, sebb wrote:
[Eventually found the KEYS file in SVN, but it might be helpful to
provide a pointer in the vote mails]
The NOTICE file in uimaj-2.2.1-incubating-bin.zip refers to the
contributions from IBM:
Software Grant License Agreement, informally known as the
sebb wrote:
[Eventually found the KEYS file in SVN, but it might be helpful to
provide a pointer in the vote mails]
yeah, I went to their website and followed the link from there.
The NOTICE file in uimaj-2.2.1-incubating-bin.zip refers to the
contributions from IBM:
Software Grant
On 15/12/2007, Jean T. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sebb wrote:
[Eventually found the KEYS file in SVN, but it might be helpful to
provide a pointer in the vote mails]
yeah, I went to their website and followed the link from there.
So did I.
The NOTICE file in
resend from an email that won't need moderation (sorry for the dup).
sebb wrote:
On 15/12/2007, Jean T. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sebb wrote:
The NOTICE file in uimaj-2.2.1-incubating-bin.zip refers to the
contributions from IBM:
Software Grant License Agreement, informally
We've put the LICENSE, NOTICES, and DISCLAIMERs into the top directory
of the source (and binary) distribution(s), but didn't realize this also
needs to be in the top level of the SVN tag, because we didn't know that
was considered part of the distribution.
Can you please confirm this is the
Marshall Schor wrote:
We've put the LICENSE, NOTICES, and DISCLAIMERs into the top directory
of the source (and binary) distribution(s), but didn't realize this also
needs to be in the top level of the SVN tag, because we didn't know that
was considered part of the distribution.
Can you please
+1
I looked at the rat reports and poked around the src and binaries. All
looked good to me.
--kevan
On Dec 13, 2007, at 6:50 AM, Michael Baessler wrote:
The Apache UIMA committers ask the Apache Incubator PMC for
permission to publish a new bug fix release of Apache UIMA. This
release
The Apache UIMA committers ask the Apache Incubator PMC for
permission to publish a new bug fix release of Apache UIMA.
This release contains bug fixes of the Apache UIMA 2.2.0 release published in
August 2007. For details about the fixes, please have a look at the
release notes.
We had a
On Dec 13, 2007 11:50 AM, Michael Baessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Apache UIMA committers ask the Apache Incubator PMC for
permission to publish a new bug fix release of Apache UIMA.
This release contains bug fixes of the Apache UIMA 2.2.0 release published
in
August 2007. For details
Looks good to me as well.
[X] +1 Accept to release Apache UIMA 2.2.1
Matthieu
On Dec 13, 2007 5:53 AM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 13, 2007 11:50 AM, Michael Baessler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The Apache UIMA committers ask the Apache Incubator PMC for
permission to
44 matches
Mail list logo
