Thank you for your diligence in working through the release process! :-) Gary
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 12:28 PM, Sergio Fernández <[email protected]> wrote: > The vote for releasing Apache Commons RDF 0.5.0 from RC1 is CANCELLED. > > In the next few days I'll prepare a new RC. > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 5:52 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Can you please reply to this thread and change the subject to add > > "[RESULT]" to the subject? This will close the thread. > > > > Gary > > > > On Nov 12, 2017 15:15, "Sergio Fernández" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Stian, I made a mistake, so we preferred to skip 0.4.0 for safety. > > > > > > About the release itself, that's reason enough gor me for a RC2. The I > > can > > > also align with Jena's recent release and so on. I hope to have time to > > > prepare it within the next couple of days. Any further feedback will be > > > more than welcome. > > > > > > Then, please, consider this vote CANCELLED. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 10, 2017 05:47, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for the effort, Sergio! And also thanks for the clean-up, Gary! > > > About time for a release. (What happened to 0.4.0?) > > > > > > > > > My vote: +0 (binding): Extra files in the dist archive > > > > > > > > > Checked: signatures, hashes, builds. > > > > > > > > > Tested with Ubuntu 16.04: > > > $ mvn -v > > > Apache Maven 3.3.9 > > > Maven home: /usr/share/maven > > > Java version: 1.8.0_151, vendor: Oracle Corporation > > > Java home: /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/jre > > > Default locale: en_GB, platform encoding: UTF-8 > > > OS name: "linux", version: "4.10.0-38-generic", arch: "amd64", family: > > > "unix" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The commons-rdf-examples still says 0.3.0 in its pom - perhaps we > > > should look at a way to add the examples straight to the build so its > > > version numbers get updated by the release process -- however I think > > > it's good that it has a com.example pom.xml rather than implying to > > > fresh Maven users they need to use our <parent> etc. > > > > > > (btw, the examples compile and run well updated at 0.5.0) > > > > > > > > > About extra files: > > > > > > I see release.properties and pom.xml.releaseBackup is included in the > > > zip file, which is a bit odd. This implies you zipped it up manually? > > > This is a bit fragile.. > > > > > > > > > I would expect the release file to be the same as > > > commons-rdf-parent-0.5.0-src.zip in the Maven repo > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ > > > orgapachecommons-1287/org/apache/commons/commons-rdf-parent/0.5.0/ > > > > > > That archive does not include any releasePackup files or similar. It > > > should also be under target/checkout/target after you released - > > > probably then called apache-commons-rdf-0.5.0-src.zip because the > > > release profile correctly overrides the local name. > > > > > > > > > > > > stain@biggie:~/tmp$ diff -ur from-git from-dist/apache-commons-rdf- > 0.5.0 > > > Only in from-dist/apache-commons-rdf-0.5.0/commons-rdf-api: > > > pom.xml.releaseBackup > > > Only in from-dist/apache-commons-rdf-0.5.0/commons-rdf-integration- > > tests: > > > pom.xml.releaseBackup > > > Only in from-dist/apache-commons-rdf-0.5.0/commons-rdf-jena: > > > pom.xml.releaseBackup > > > Only in from-dist/apache-commons-rdf-0.5.0/commons-rdf-jsonld-java: > > > pom.xml.releaseBackup > > > Only in from-dist/apache-commons-rdf-0.5.0/commons-rdf-rdf4j: > > > pom.xml.releaseBackup > > > Only in from-dist/apache-commons-rdf-0.5.0/commons-rdf-simple: > > > pom.xml.releaseBackup > > > Only in from-git: .git > > > Only in from-git: .gitignore > > > Only in from-dist/apache-commons-rdf-0.5.0: release.properties > > > Only in from-git: .travis.yml > > > > > > stain@biggie:~/tmp$ diff -ur from-git from-repo/apache-commons-rdf- > 0.5.0 > > > Only in from-git: .git > > > Only in from-git: .gitignore > > > Only in from-git: .travis.yml > > > > > > So the one in Maven staging repo more closely match git -- also if > > > it's the very same file (although different filename) a pet love of me > > > to easily double-check that the staging repo covers directly the > > > source of the RC vote. > > > > > > > > > My preference would be to put the renamed -src.zip from the staging > > > repo in dist and re-run the VOTE as "RC2" with same staging repo > > > > > > Of course in this case there is not any harm of those extra files (and > > > I verified it still matched git tag and repo archive) - so just a +0 > > > from me. > > > > > > On 7 November 2017 at 03:40, Sergio Fernández <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > coming closed to the Commons PMC procedure, I'd like to update the > vote > > > > with the following information: > > > > > > > > * Source release can be found in the office dist area: > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/rdf/apache- > > > commons-rdf-0.5.0-RC1/ > > > > > > > > * 0.5.0-RC1 tagged at git: > > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-rdf.git;a= > commit;h= > > > ebffdc5890a0f8523b07ff6df8afae461117f832 > > > > > > > > * Hashes and signatures remain as the original email. > > > > > > > > * Added our GPG keys to the Commons file at > > > > https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS > > > > > > > > I hope these changes makes the PMC more conformable about voting the > > > > release. If not, please let me know and I'll try to cut a new RC > > > addressing > > > > any possible issue. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Sergio Fernández <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > >> > > > >> of course, my vote for Apache Commons RDF 0.5.0 from RC1: +1 > > > (non-binding) > > > >> > > > >> Thanks for all feedback. I'll try to answer some of the comments > > > received > > > >> so far. > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Aaron Coburn <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > I did have some problems building with JDK9 (OS X), first with the > > > >> version of > > > >> > the JaCoCo plugin and then later (after changing to a more recent > > > >> version of > > > >> > the plugin) with the japicmp plugin. These would be nice things to > > > fix, > > > >> but > > > >> > I don't see any reason that they need to hold up this release, as > > the > > > >> > JDK8-built artifacts work just fine when running in JDK9. > > > >> > > > >> I guess most of us we have quite some pending tasks regarding > upgrade > > > >> / make compatible our different source bases with JDK9. > > > >> > > > >> So I've registered the request as COMMONSRDF-67. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:00 AM, Bruno P. Kinoshita < > > > >> [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > Any plans to use the changes.xml file for next releases? > > > >> > > > >> Sound like a good idea to me. Registwered as COMMONSRDF-68 for the > > next > > > >> release. > > > >> > > > >> > I have an automated script that downloads the KEYS file from > > > >> https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS, > > > >> > and it failed. Then re-read the e-mail and found the KEYS here > > > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/ > commonsrdf/KEYS: > > > >> > > > > >> > Does it matter which KEYS file is used after the component has > been > > > >> graduated? > > > >> > I'm fine with the KEYS file location being in the vote thread, but > > > just > > > >> thought it > > > >> > would be worth checking. > > > >> > > > >> As I pointed in a previous thread, although we graduated as a > > component, > > > >> most of the team behind the RDF component we are not PMC members. I > > > don't > > > >> have karma for that, but someone should add our KEYS there. I just > > > though > > > >> the file we had during incubation was good enough. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Another minor nit pick: Notice file message was not updated to > 2017. > > > >> > > > >> Do you think that could be blocking? Well, noted as COMMONSRDF-69 > for > > > now. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Thanks. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Stian Soiland-Reyes > > > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > >
