Hi Ate,

In that case, will put out a VOTE so the 72 hour clock can start tickling, but 
if you find any further blockers, we can retract and address the issues. 

Suresh
On Feb 5, 2012, at 8:44 PM, Ate Douma wrote:

> On 02/05/2012 04:51 PM, Lahiru Gunathilake wrote:
>> Hi Ate,
>> 
>> Can you please do the check for us and let us know what are the blockers ..
> 
> I will, but I'm afraid I won't have time for this before tomorrow evening.
> And I have a similar (earlier) task/request pending for Apache Wookie too :)
> 
> I saw Chris already gave you the heads-up he's ready for another VOTE, so if 
> that means he already did the LICENSE/NOTICE requirements review, you might 
> not want or need to wait for me.
> 
> I'll do my best to look into it ASAP as well though.
> 
> Regards, Ate
> 
>> ?
>> 
>> Regards
>> Lahiru
>> 
>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Suresh Marru<[email protected]>  wrote:
>> 
>>> I just noticed one, issue with the LICENSE in the source folder, it has
>>> too many other licenses which are not needed in included in the source.
>>> Will fix this before the vote, along with any other issues discovered.
>>> Please just ignore this and review the blockers from previous RC's
>>> 
>>> Suresh
>>> 
>>> On Feb 5, 2012, at 4:36 AM, Suresh Marru wrote:
>>> 
>>> Many thanks to Lahiru&  Heshan for going through each of the pom's and
>>> making sure all license and notice files now cover transitive dependencies.
>>> I did a sanity check and also cleaned up the builds. All the concerns
>>> raised so far seems to be addressed.
>>> 
>>> I want to summarize the issues raised for 0.2-Incubating RC1 and see if we
>>> have addressed them. Once we make sure all issues are addressed, we can go
>>> for a formal vote.
>>> 
>>> Chris:
>>> * There are multiple url's which is inconvenient for reviewers
>>> * After vote, the source and binary have to be staged on ASF mirrored
>>> location.
>>> --Both of these are addressed in consultation with Chris and will follow
>>> these for RC2 and further releases
>>> 
>>> Alek:
>>> * Axis2 pom download error
>>> --It is caused by a corrupt axis2 pom unrelated to the RC. Rebuilding with
>>> a clean .m2 worked.
>>> * Type in README
>>> --fixed.
>>> * Usability issue in 10 minute tutorial related to XML serialization
>>> --deferred to future release for improvements.
>>> 
>>> Ate:
>>> * Multiple concerns on 3rd party licenses and notices
>>>  --There were two issues, firstly the build was not copying the correct
>>> L&N files and secondly the transitive licenses were incomplete. Both of
>>> these issues are now addressed.
>>> 
>>> Please verify if the above issues are fixed in the following:
>>> 
>>> Unified release URL -
>>> http://people.apache.org/builds/incubator/airavata/0.2-incubating/rc2/
>>> 
>>> detailed urls:
>>> Source -
>>> http://people.apache.org/builds/incubator/airavata/0.2-incubating/rc2/airavata-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>> ChangeLog -
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/airavata/tags/airavata-0.2-incubating/RELEASE_NOTES
>>> Binary -
>>> http://people.apache.org/builds/incubator/airavata/0.2-incubating/rc2/apache-airavata-0.2-incubating-bin.zip
>>> Maven staging repo -
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheairavata-193/org/apache/airavata/
>>> KEYS - https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/airavata/KEYS ((signed
>>> using 617DDBAD)
>>> 
>>> Hi Ate,
>>> 
>>> I think we have enough eye balls looking at the technical validity of the
>>> release but need your techno-legal expertise to make sure L,N,D files meet
>>> the requirements. Will greatly appreciate your time.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Suresh
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jan 29, 2012, at 3:47 AM, Suresh Marru wrote:
>>> 
>>> Discussion thread for vote on airavata 0.2-incubating release candidate 2.
>>> 
>>> If you have any questions or feedback or to post results of validating the
>>> release, please reply to this thread.
>>> 
>>> For reference, the Apache release guide  -
>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>>> Incubator specific release guidelines -
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>> 
>>> Some tips to validate the release before you vote:
>>> 
>>> * Download the binary version and run the 5 minute or 10 minute tutorial
>>> as described in README and website.
>>> * Download the source files from compressed files and release tag and
>>> build (which includes tests).
>>> * Verify the distributon for the required LICENSE, NOTICE and DISCLAIMER
>>> files
>>> * Verify if all the staged files are signed and the signature is
>>> verifiable.
>>> * Verify if the signing key in the project's KEYS file is hosted on a
>>> public server
>>> 
>>> Thanks for your time in validating the release and voting,
>>> Suresh
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> 
>>> iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJPLk6NAAoJEHmz9P1hfdutWgYQAJi6QY5bf7H8L6d4G1ZhWDDt
>>> aZG+ita3oAFrCUK2ESPIP3QbEqrVFO4wt906p1m767PbAhmyaLfeaXmI1xFlZzc9
>>> ihr3rmbDLIsBBcGJ+m9MkwmCsb5pDqQGSMbErAVTU+UuXyhiQBq/Qu8l1FOWlxbf
>>> 7EZ0DtEkUq0ccIqagqTkwOGchhaKWHPgCETB6ixeIH18ShcmwGggkLhLa0e2PTgz
>>> yvha8s0Mo5Q9pOJceh+No89utBK3Tno6tKPoGTPIg41c9EYsaGpFbiHltDT0YdQk
>>> Cwt30WD0z7ZFL7djSLjVkaJciPDANpi2wMmPblrQaEIiJfTi7b+jnY+p4FAtc2mC
>>> XptNbxVPdg38fCm9uUQhf04nh2/TDi3M8BpGC5lAM8RzRo7xEFK86Qs7L6L5Vae5
>>> oEqs3wovBNAdOR3K11g/zwPfmPXGj8h+oYDmGYdDJ1n2SByj42b55QpqLzlzIDj9
>>> sOM42ZwkAUQtZzpv6j2/XhnsH7WzKu92oEGawkp7IOQCJFy8FdrR7FpJA9uSOsrY
>>> cl+lYqb+25+DkhWauzti/+9ikRkNmoSsqNRK1m72w+HkJOBoxXGDTVb0UnLLJjYj
>>> RuGjNY6HpLiyVYtqTW+S9bAZa6njKT/1taixU1K3ym0MfJveQcZpC6awJ86vDnna
>>> LR5xanLGTweMvpBPebbk
>>> =IlYW
>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Reply via email to