On 4/14/10 12:39 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
A few general notes to the community about Apache releases, since this is the first
release. Fundamentally, release notes apply to source code. Although the svn tag is
typically what you think about for a "release". The actual release, from an ASF
perspective, is the source archive prepared by the release manager. Quite complicated in
this case, since there are so many release archives (e.g.
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-010/org/apache/aries/blueprint/blueprint/0.1-incubating/blueprint-0.1-incubating-source-release.zip
)
Good point. I reviewed the tag but didn't look in detail at these
archives. Looking a bit more closely I see the following:
- Instead of just parent there are 3 source "parent" archives: parent,
default-parent, and java5-parent. Was that by design?
- I don't see a samples source archive anywhere.
Based upon the missing samples archive, Kevan's license concerns, and
the missing samples archive I have to change my vote to "-1".
Joe
Actally building all of these projects is a pain in the rump...
BTW, I sometimes diff the source "release" archive against the svn tag. Note
that several of the release archives contain a DEPENDENCY file that isn't in svn. I don't
see an issue releasing with the DEPENDENCY file, just pointing out that there can be
differences...
I've sampled the signature/checksums -- they look good. RAT output looks good.
Build is painful, but worked.
I see a few issues with the LICENSE files, however:
1) jpa-0.1-incubating includes two dual-licensed files (persistence-xsd.rsrc
and persistence_2_0-xsd.rsrc). The LICENSE in the jar file properly reflects
this. However, the files are also in the source. So, they also need to be
included in the source LICENSE file
2) Since Apache will not redistribute these files under GPL, we must explicitly choose
the license we are applying to these files. As the license explains in these two files by
including the following: "[Contributor] elects to include this software in this
distribution under the [CDDL or GPL Version 2] license."
3) org.apache.aries.transaction.manager-0.1-incubating.jar contains Geronimo
and HOWL class files. However, the jar file does not properly reflect this in
the LICENSE/NOTICE files. Geronimo should be fine, I think the Geronimo
transaction notice file only refers to the geronimo project. However, the HOWL
license needs to be included in the LICENSE file.
Base on the above, I'm -1.
I didn't see any other issues...
--kevan
On Apr 9, 2010, at 8:42 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
I've staged a release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1. The
following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
932654. The artifacts are in two staged repos.
Modules staged at
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-008/
are:
parent
eba-maven-plugin
testsupport
util
transaction
web
application
jmx
jpa
samples
Modules staged at
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-010/
are:
blueprint
jndi
The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
The vote will be open for 72 hours.
[ ] +1
[ ] +0
[ ] -1
Thanks,
Jeremy
--
Joe
