Alright looks like I'm on a hold briefly for the next RC as it sounds as though there will be some work over the weekend. I'll touch base again on Monday for the next RC.
--Paul Sent from my iPhone > On Jul 31, 2014, at 6:03 AM, "Michael Joyce" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for checking all this Lewis. I'll be sure to help you get some of > these issues resolved this weekend/upcoming week (although it looks like > you made some great headway already with CLIMATE-500). > > I think I had a ticket open for resolving some of these license issues as > well. I'll see if I can find it and link it to the issue. I'll also go > through and cleanup any of the frontend stuff that is missing headers. I > know I made that worse when I began the transition over to the "new" > frontend since I copy/pasted a large amount of files from the old UI and > haven't updated the others. > > > -- Joyce > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Feel free to use my apachestuff scripts for release verification: >> >> https://github.com/chrismattmann/apachestuff/ >> >> Cheers, >> Chris >> >> P.S. Thanks Lewis >> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. >> Chief Architect >> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398) >> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA >> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527 >> Email: [email protected] >> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department >> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Lewis John Mcgibbney <[email protected]> >> Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 2:20 AM >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OCW 0.4 Release >> >>> Thank you Paul for running with this. >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 5:06 PM, <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Subject: [VOTE] Apache OCW 0.4 Release >>>> Hi Folks, >>>> >>>> I have posted a 1st release candidate for the Apache OCW 0.4 release. >>>> The >>>> source code is at: >>>> >>>> http://people.apache.org/~pramirez/apache-ocw-0.4/rc1/ >>> >>> Thanks for this? Do we only release .zip**? I am not bothered about this >>> is >>> is merely an observation. >>> >>> **my opinion based on users outside of vagrant or dev environment >>> >>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLIMATE/Software+Release+Proc >>>> ess >>> >>> We need to update this process based upon Git process. I REALLY praise you >>> here for pushing a candidate based upon a process which requires work. We >>> can work to make this better. It is NOWEHRE like a blocker. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> The release was made from (commit >>>> 1c8631ce0ba51e8f1839d009cae4fdf5280f8ab1) at: >>>> >>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/climate.git >>> >>> I really think that the releae procedure needs to accomodate a tag within >>> git. AFAICT we currently have no tag for this release! >>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=climate.git;a=tags >>> Is this required? >>> I would this so... it gives us a good mechanism for reverting back to >>> should we require it. Or should some other person require a 'stable' >>> release in the future. >>> If you have a tag elsewhere Paul I am sorry for the inconvenience. >>> >>> OK lets move on, >>> >>> CHANGES.txt [0] looks perfect as per JIRA report [1] >>> >>> [0] http://people.apache.org/~pramirez/apache-ocw-0.4/rc1/CHANGES-0.4.txt >>> [1] >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314422&; >>> version=12325041 >>> >>> lmcgibbn@LMC-032857 ~/Downloads/climate $ ls >>> KEYS-0.4 climate-0.4-rc1.zip climate-0.4-rc1.zip.asc >>> climate-0.4-rc1.zip.md5 climate-0.4-rc1.zip.sha1 >>> >>> lmcgibbn@LMC-032857 ~/Downloads/climate $ gpg --import KEYS-0.4 >>> gpg: key 58EBE86D: public key "Cameron Goodale (FOR CODE SIGNING) < >>> [email protected]>" imported >>> gpg: key 2C47D568: public key "Paul Michael Ramirez (CODE SIGNING KEY) < >>> [email protected]>" imported >>> gpg: Total number processed: 2 >>> gpg: imported: 2 (RSA: 2) >>> >>> lmcgibbn@LMC-032857 ~/Downloads/climate $ gpg --verify >>> climate-0.4-rc1.zip.asc >>> gpg: Signature made Thu Jul 24 16:42:43 2014 EDT using RSA key ID 2C47D568 >>> gpg: Good signature from "Paul Michael Ramirez (CODE SIGNING KEY) < >>> [email protected]>" >>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! >>> gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the >>> owner. >>> Primary key fingerprint: FA78 6E77 5FF1 0023 D990 4D13 A5DB C018 2C47 >>> D568 >>> >>> lmcgibbn@LMC-032857 ~/Downloads/climate $ md5 climate-0.4-rc1.zip >>> MD5 (climate-0.4-rc1.zip) = db25d3ac77fee19bfb42a156b71d62c1 >>> >>> ALL Perfect. Looks great to me. Check out great. >>> >>> OK so when I extract the .zip into my local directory >>> >>> CHANGES, KEYS, LICENSE, NOTICE are all flawless (AFAIC) >>> @Michael Joyce, thank you SO much for attributing the following within >>> NOTICE >>> This product includes work released as public domain by Yannick Copin >>> (ycopin on Github). For details please see: >>> https://gist.github.com/ycopin/3342888 >>> https://github.com/ycopin >>> http://snovae.in2p3.fr/ycopin/ >>> >>> This makes life and day. >>> >>> The DOAP has not been updated, but this is certianly not blocker by any >>> means. >>> >>> Imagine I dodn't know how to build the docs (e.g. new user) it is not a >>> blocker IMHO by any means.I think we can log a ticket for making >>> documentation navigation much more simple. This would be a HUGE +1. >>> >>> I ran (based on learning from you guys) the tests I could... passed. No >>> problems it would seem. >>> I believe we should really address this however within the README.md. >>> >>> >>>> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OCW 0.4. The vote is >>>> open for the next 72 hours. >>>> >>>> Only votes from Apache OCW PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to >>>> check >>>> the >>>> release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote >>>> passes >>>> if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. >>>> >>>> [X] +1 Release the packages as Apache OCW 0.4 >>> >>> >>> I've run DRAT on the release candidate >> >>
