Stephen McConnell wrote:
Berin Loritsch wrote:
Do we release or not? I originally posted the vote yesterday,
so voting is open until next Thursday. PLEASE vote. Since this
is a release, it requires PMC sign-off (simple majority). If
we do not reach quorum then it delays the LogKit 1.2 release.
Also, please only vote against it if there is any showstoppers.
We corrected one, and the new API stuff should be close enough
for government work. Let's get this thing out.
Following my failed attempts at generating the dist, I'm obliged to put
up a -1 pending ...
(1) a proper jar manifest
(2) javadoc generation without errors
(3) dist generation without errors
I don't know how you want to handle this but I would suggest we clean
this issues up rapidly, get a RC7 dist in place, do the validation and
commence a new vote ASAP (e.g. "[PMC:VOTE] Logkit RC7 for product
release").
Steve, let's get on with this already. It doesn't have to be pristine,
but it does have to be released.
Your obsession with the "proper jar manifest" eludes my understanding.
I have been using LogKit all this time with the current manifest without
problems.
Javadoc generation "without" errors is not a mission critical problem.
Hosed up log rotation code is. We need to get a release out there soon.
I am tired of seeing little piddly things come up trying to slow down
or derail the release. Can I encourage us in something?
It's Open Source software! It doesn't have to be 100% perfect with
every 'i' dotted and every 't' crossed. The code (which is what is
important) *works*, and people need it.
So let's get off our high horses. If there is a *major* *technical*
reason why it should not be released, issue a -1. However these things
are very minor, and they can be fixed later.
THe dist generation works--how do you think that I have been making
them?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
