#7 is exactly what I did for Accumulo 1.4.4 - I don't think the we should be tagging something as X is X has not been voted on. X-rcY (or some permutation) is fine.
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: > #5, #6, and #7 need to be fixed. #1, #2, and #8 are trivial to fix > while addressing the others. > > #3 only needs to be fixed if the missing ones are important.. but I > don't really know what they're for. > > > -- > Christopher L Tubbs II > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Keith Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> MD5s and SHA1s look good, and so does the GPG signatures. > >> > >> I saw the following issues: > >> > >> 1) No javadoc jar (should be defined in the "apache-release" profile). > >> 2) Tarball looks like it isn't using gnu tar format. This could cause > >> problems with long filenames on some systems. You need the following > >> in your pluginManagement section: > >> <plugin> > >> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> > >> <artifactId>maven-assembly-plugin</artifactId> > >> <configuration> > >> <tarLongFileMode>gnu</tarLongFileMode> > >> </configuration> > >> </plugin> > >> (I really don't know why that isn't the default. This might be > >> addressed with the "apache-release" profile) > >> 3) What's the deal with the #set lines at the top of the file? What do > >> these do? Are these needed? Because ShellExample.java is missing them. > >> Is that expected? > >> 4) There appears to be two distinct READMEs. Would it be better to > >> consolidate them? > >> > > > > I think not. One is directed to someone building the archetype and one > to > > someone using the archetype. I think it saves end users time to split > them. > > > > > >> 5) There appears to be a discrepancy between the LICENSE and NOTICE > >> files that are in the project and the archetype-resources. I'd expect > >> them to be the same. > >> 6) I can't see the commit you referenced above, because it hasn't been > >> pushed. You should push it in another branch, if you don't want to tag > >> it, so I can compare the source in that commit with the contents of > >> the tarball, before it's actually tagged as "1.4.4" upon vote success. > >> 7) It looks like the release plugin put in the wrong tag name > >> ("1.4.4-RC2" instead of "1.4.4"). > >> 8) I think the attaching sources is redundant, because it's configured > >> in the parent POM's "apache-release" profile. > >> > >> Overall, -1, due to the above issues (though they are all minor, they > add > >> up). > >> > > > > Which issues do you think must be fixed? > > > > > >> > >> -- > >> Christopher L Tubbs II > >> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 10:42 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > Devs, > >> > > >> > Please consider the following candidate project as a "sister" release > to > >> > Apache Accumulo 1.4.4: Apache Accumulo Instamo Archetype 1.4.4 > >> > > >> > Staging repo: > >> > > >> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheaccumulo-089/ > >> > Source tarball: > >> > > >> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheaccumulo-089/org/apache/accumulo/instamo-archetype/1.4.4/instamo-archetype-1.4.4-source-release.tar.gz > >> > Git tag: 56e3c674674dc2521a76dce2466360b1f82ca0ea (1.4.4-RC2) > >> > > >> > This release has improvements over the last release candidate: > >> > > >> > 1) Update archetype's pom to the most recent Apache pom > >> > 2) Generates source-release zip and tarball automatically > >> > 3) Don't push changes on release:prepare > >> > > >> > This vote is open for 72hrs. > >> > > >> > - Josh > >> >
