Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

I read through the source of rcverify before voting. Looks sufficient to cover the release checks. On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 18:48, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > +1 (binding) > > I checked: > - Incubating in name > - signatures and hash file fine > - DISCLAIMER exists > - LICENSE and NOTICE good

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

Hi, +1 (binding) I checked: - Incubating in name - signatures and hash file fine - DISCLAIMER exists - LICENSE and NOTICE good - code in release candidate matches code in version control - No unexpected binary files - Source files have correct header except one which has been fixed. Thanks,

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

Hi, One issue I see with the instructions script is that you are asking people to download it from head, this may make it hard to verify old releases or may give different results during the voting process if changes are made. It may be better to package the verifying script inside the release

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

Hi Dave, Thanks! I’m glad Bertrand has been a help. OpenWhisk is similar to Sling in that there are a number of repositories and release artifacts. Regards, Dave > On Apr 22, 2019, at 3:14 PM, David P Grove wrote: > > > > > On 2019/04/22 19:09:36, Dave Fisher wrote: >> Hi - >> >> I am

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

We do still need one more binding +1 vote from an IMPC member to be able to close this vote and finally make this release. If someone would be willing to either use the rcverify.sh script we use in the OpenWhisk project as described below or otherwise check the artifacts at

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

Justin Mclean wrote on 04/25/2019 10:41:28 PM: > > Hi, > > > If that URL was missing what where people actually voting on? > Looking at the vote thread on the dev list it seem it was a GitHub hash?? > > Can anyone answer this? Per the original dev list vote email [1] > You can use this UNIX

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

Hi, > If that URL was missing what where people actually voting on? Looking at the > vote thread on the dev list it seem it was a GitHub hash?? Can anyone answer this? Thanks, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

On 2019/04/22 19:09:36, Dave Fisher wrote: > Hi - > > I am concerned about an overly automated release process. Please explain what the role of the Release Manager is in your process? How does the release manager sign these automatically generated artifacts? How are release artifacts moved

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

Hi, > We've been automating more of our release process (including generating the > call-to-vote email) and in had streamlined out the list of URLs from the > call-to-vote email. If that URL was missing what where people actually voting on? Looking at the vote thread on the dev list it seem

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

Hi - I am concerned about an overly automated release process. Please explain what the role of the Release Manager is in your process? How does the release manager sign these automatically generated artifacts? How are release artifacts moved from

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

Hi, Yes the artifact being voted on was [1]. We've been automating more of our release process (including generating the call-to-vote email) and in had streamlined out the list of URLs from the call-to-vote email. From your feedback, it seems like that was not appropriate. I will open an

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

Hi, Can someone please confirm this is the case and the vote was not just on the GitHub repo? > Assuming the artefact voted on was [1]. > > 1. > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.11.0-incubating-rc2/ Thanks, Justin

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

Hi,. Assuming the artefact voted on was [1]. I checked: - Incubating in name - signatures and hash file - DISCLAIMER exists - LICENSE and NOTICE good - No unexpected binary files - Source files have correct header except [2] This file [2] has an incorrect header [3], please fix for the next

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

Hi, It unclear what is being voted on here, please post a link to the actual artefacts being voted on not the GitHub repo. Thanks, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

While running the verification script I got an error.. $ ./rcverify.sh openwhisk-composer 'OpenWhisk Composer' 0.11.0-incubating rc2 rcverify.sh (script SHA1: 80DC 4134 B419 D699 1E19 9BBC 847A E346 EB63 57D1) working in the following directory:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer 0.11.0 (incubating)

We need 1 more binding +1 vote on this release to proceed. Thank you for your help. --dave On 2019/04/08 17:32:05, "David P Grove" wrote: > > > The Apache OpenWhisk community has voted to release Apache OpenWhisk > Composer (incubating) version 0.11.0. > Apache OpenWhisk Composer is a