+1 Clean build runs fine / all test pass on my Mac.
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <[email protected] > wrote: > Please open an issue in Jira for this one. That will touch every file. > > -JZ > > > On July 9, 2014 at 10:44:07 AM, Mike Drob ([email protected]) wrote: > > Just noticed another issue - Appendix A needs to be updated in all of the > LICENCE files. Instead of providing a year and copyright owner, we should > use placeholder values, like in > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt > > APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work. > > To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following > boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]" > replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include > the brackets!) The text should be enclosed in the appropriate > comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a > file or class name and description of purpose be included on the > same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier > identification within third-party archives. > > Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner] > > > > On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Mike Drob <[email protected]> wrote: > Just expand the header comment match what resides in the pom.xml > > Tomcat is a fine reference - > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/site/trunk/docs/doap_Tomcat.rdf > > > On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Jordan Zimmerman < > [email protected]> wrote: > * I’ve removed the dependency-reduced-pom.xml from the project. That was a > mistake. > * I’ve updated the license plugins to ignore .json and .thrift > > doap.rdf > What’s incomplete? > > It doesn't have _any_ licensing information, just a copyright assertion. > Check out LEGAL-114 and LEGAL-172 for a long history. > That doap file has been that way for a while. Curator’s doap file looks > just like ZooKeeper’s. Without having to dive into the minutia of those > docs, can you describe what needs to be added? Or, can you point to another > project’s DOAP file that is better? > > -JZ > > On July 9, 2014 at 10:20:56 AM, Mike Drob ([email protected]) wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Jordan Zimmerman < > [email protected]> wrote: > * curator-x-rpc/dependency-reduced-pom.xml > This shouldn’t be part of the project > > Then it shouldn't be in the source or the release tag. :) > * curator-x-rpc/src/test/resources/configuration/connections.json > JSON doesn’t support comments so there’s no way to have license headers. > When I run “mvn license:check” it comes back clean (with some warnings > about unknown files). > > Yea, I'm not sure there's anything to be done for these, which is > unfortunate. > doap.rdf > What’s incomplete? > > It doesn't have _any_ licensing information, just a copyright assertion. > Check out LEGAL-114 and LEGAL-172 for a long history. > > > > > On July 9, 2014 at 10:02:40 AM, Mike Drob ([email protected]) wrote: > > -1 (non-binding) > > Verified signature and hashes, all good. > > The git tag does not match the source zip: > * zip contains a file called .test.swp > * zip differs from tag on curator-x-rpc/dependency-reduced-pom.xml (brought > up in the other thread) > > Missing licence headers: > * curator-x-rpc/pom.xml > * curator-x-rpc/dependency-reduced-pom.xml > * curator-x-rpc/src/main/thrift/curator.thrift > * curator-x-rpc/src/main/resources/curator/help.txt > * curator-x-rpc/src/test/resources/configuration/connections.json > * curator-x-rpc/src/test/resources/configuration/logging.json > * curator-x-rpc/src/test/resources/configuration/simple.json > * curator-x-rpc/src/test/resources/configuration/test.json > > Incomplete licence header: > * doap.rdf > > Attempted to build from source: mvn clean verify > * Compiled cleanly! > * Had a test failure in TestDistributedDelayQueue.testSorting() (fixed in > master) > * Had a intermittent test failure in > TestDistributedQueue.testCustomExecutor() (will investigate further) > > > On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 6:47 AM, Eric Tschetter <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Wednesday, July 9, 2014, Ashish <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > Ran the build. Works fine and all test cases passed > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 5:31 AM, Jordan Zimmerman < > > > [email protected] <javascript:;> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Validated keys > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > On July 8, 2014 at 5:08:37 PM, Cameron McKenzie ( > > [email protected] > > > <javascript:;>) > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > This is the vote for Apache Curator version 2.6.0 > > > > > > > > *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours > > > > > > > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are > > > > provided for convenience. > > > > > > > > Link to release > > > > notes: > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12327098 > > > > > > > > Staging repo:https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.6.0/ > > > > > > > > Binary artifacts: > > > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1004 > > > > > > > > > > > > The tag to be voted > > > > upon: > > > > > > > > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=apache-curator-2.6.0 > > > > > > > > Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the > > > > release:http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS > > > > > > > > [ ] +1 approve > > > > [ ] +0 no opinion > > > > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) > > > > > > > > > > > > cheers > > > > > > > > Cam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > thanks > > > ashish > > > > > > Blog: http://www.ashishpaliwal.com/blog > > > My Photo Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/ashishpaliwal > > > > > > > > >
