I looked at the jpa stuff for a minute and found a couple egregious errors I fixed in rev 935098, ARIES-287. IMO this needs to get into the next RC.
BTW did the original vote get cancelled due to kevan's -1 (it should have been if not, here's my supporting -1 if its needed)? Usually its a good idea to send out a email on the thread explicitly cancelling it. thanks david jencks On Apr 14, 2010, at 2:42 PM, David Jencks wrote: > > On Apr 14, 2010, at 11:26 AM, Joe Bohn wrote: > >> 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? > yes > > david jencks > >> - 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 >
