Hi Phil, Thanks very much for having a look at this.
*** Reports from anyone else would still be very welcome*** On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 15:50 -0400, Phil Steitz wrote: > > * download and unpack the src and bin distributions, and > > verify that the contents are all as expected > > Looks good. Checked maven and ant builds and both ran fine. I used > the jar versions from the maven dependency list (pulled from my local > maven repo) to test the ant build. It might be good to doc the > required versions in build.properties.sample or in a README for ant > users. I don't like having the version info in multiple places, as later releases might mistakenly not update them all. However I have added a comment in the build.properties.sample file pointing people at the project.xml or RELEASE-NOTES.txt. The RELEASE-NOTES.txt is actually the best source of info at the moment, as there are several combinations of valid dependencies. > The xml-apis dependency in project.xml does not appear in the > ant build and maven test works without it, so this may be extraneous? File xml-apis.jar is the xerces equivalent of jaxp.jar. Neither is needed when using java 1.4 or later as these classes are built-in. > > > * browse the updated website (in the site subdirectory) and > > look for any errors. > > Assm link to "Javadoc API docs" will end up pointing to current > release javadoc. Also need to remove or change the date (June 1) for > 1.7 release. A couple of contributors have non-obfuscated emal > addresses in project.xml that will go on the site. Are we sure they > are OK with that? The javadoc links are ok; when I deploy I will rename directories on people.apache.org as needed. I'll try to remember to update the date. It's a shame it isn't automatic. Anyway, a week or two's difference shouldn't matter. Bradley and Wendy have had their addresses up on the existing site for some time. > One little nit. What exactly is license-header.txt for? It specifies > a start date of 2001. This should probably not be used for new files. It's mainly used by checkstyle to ensure that all java files have the right copyright/license header. Line 3 of the file is explicitly ignored, though, so files can have different copyright dates. See file checkstyle.xml. Being able to use it as a template for future files is just a bonus, and you are quite right that people will then have to edit the copyright date as appropriate. I've fixed tabs in the other files you pointed out in a separate email. Thanks. I hope to hear back from the end-user who actually requested a release soon; that should cover testing the release in an actual app. Assuming that's ok and no other problems appear I will then be posting a vote for actual release. Regards, Simon --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
