I did a mistake by committing and pushing asf-site docs and apidocs directly. :-( I'll revert it and upload the docs into builds/2.3.27-voting/documentation/ again. Sorry for this.
Regards, Woonsan On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 5:13 AM, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> wrote: > OK, ot looks good to me. We can continue! > > > Monday, October 16, 2017, 8:11:22 AM, Daniel Dekany wrote: > >> Monday, October 16, 2017, 4:23:45 AM, Woonsan Ko wrote: >> >>> Hi Daniel, >>> >>> Thank you very much for fixing the issues! >>> >>> I've just completed the steps to #10 [1] in both 2.3 and 2.3-gae branches. >>> >>> All the artifacts of both FreeMarker-2.3.27 and FreeMarker-GAE-2.3.27 >>> were uploaded here: >>> - >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/freemarker/engine/2.3.27-incubating-preliminary/ >>> >>> Also, maven staging repositories were closed here for both: >>> - [FreeMarker-2.3.27] >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefreemarker-1011/ >>> - [FreeMarker-GAE-2.3.27] >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefreemarker-1012/ >>> >>> PGP signatures were verified: >>> >>> [echo] *** Signature verification: *** >>> [exec] gpg: Signature made Sun Oct 15 21:19:54 2017 EDT >>> [exec] gpg: using RSA key >>> 04DE676E3FFFD9C2DD767C2FA25D65D27C13ADCE >>> [exec] gpg: Good signature from "Woonsan Ko <[email protected]>" >>> [ultimate] >>> [input] Is the above signer the intended one for Apache releases? (y, n) >>> y >>> // ... >>> [echo] *** Signature verification: *** >>> [exec] gpg: Signature made Sun Oct 15 21:20:05 2017 EDT >>> [exec] gpg: using RSA key >>> 04DE676E3FFFD9C2DD767C2FA25D65D27C13ADCE >>> [exec] gpg: Good signature from "Woonsan Ko <[email protected]>" >>> [ultimate] >>> [input] Is the above signer the intended one for Apache releases? (y, n) >>> y >>> // ... >>> >>> Java API Compliance Checker results were positive, too, in both branches: >>> >>> Binary compatibility: 100% >>> Source compatibility: 100% >>> Total binary compatibility problems: 0, warnings: 0 >>> Total source compatibility problems: 0, warnings: 0 >>> >>> Please take a review. >> >> I will soon hopefully. >> >> Please write down what do you think should be improved in the >> documentation of the process, or in the process itself. >> >> (BTW, version.properties changes can be merged from 2.3-gae as well; >> it need not be done separately in 2.3.) >> >>> I have one question regarding the step #11. What is 'the release >>> documentation'? >> >> It's just the documentation (the Manual) of the release. It's for >> convenience for the voters, and that's where the link to the change >> log points to in the vote mail. >> >>> And I couldn't find a previous release documentation >>> (e.g, http://freemarker.org/builds/2.3.26-voting/documentation/). >> >> It was deleted after the voting. >> >>> Could you please give a hint? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Woonsan >>> >>> [1] http://freemarker.org/committer-howto.html#making-releases >>> >>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> All right, I think we are ready again... the release process can be >>>> started. >>>> >>>> >>>> Tuesday, October 3, 2017, 5:01:22 PM, Woonsan Ko wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> I was looking into the Java Beans indexed property related changes, >>>>>> and have realized that it exposes long existing oversight, that didn't >>>>>> affect us earlier because the indexed property reader has always >>>>>> shadowed the normal reader method, which is in fact wrong in rare >>>>>> cases. >>>>>> >>>>>> I will also look into >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FREEMARKER-80 (reported today). >>>>>> If we are lucky, it can be "fixed" without too much mess. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have also realized that some Java 9 testing will be needed. Just for >>>>>> starters, our XML wrapper won't be able to use the internal Xerces of >>>>>> Java, so one has to add a normal Xerces to the classpath or Jaxen to >>>>>> use XPath... which should be documented. Also, java.bean.Introspector >>>>>> behavioral changes (if there was any) like to break things (as they >>>>>> did in Java 8). It would be unfortunate if that happens due to the >>>>>> default method related workarounds added in 2.3.27. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry Woonsan if it this additional iteration causes extra work... as >>>>>> I seen you have recently upload another preliminary version. >>>>> >>>>> No worries at all! We'll start it again when ready. No big deal from my >>>>> end. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Woonsan >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Daniel Dekany >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thanks, >>>> Daniel Dekany >>>> >>> >> > > -- > Thanks, > Daniel Dekany >
