You're right. The README does mention the bootstrap sequence. I probably skimmed through it too fast so that I missed it.
The source package builds successfully as long as - gradle.properties has a license header - gradle.properties is excluded from rat Because of this, the source package must be updated so the current zip file would not be good, hence the -1. Perhaps I misunderstood the voting process. I thought that if source package is not good enough then either 0 or -1 is issued (like in this case). If the # -1s outweigh +1s a new package should be created (or is it just a handful? or one -1 is enough to back it up?). Fixing gradle.properties and invoking build makes all tests go green and produces a good binary. that would change my -1 to +1!!! Cheers, Andres ------------------------------------------- Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast http://jroller.com/aalmiray http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray -- What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator. There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion. On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:15 PM, Cédric Champeau <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 2015-07-09 23:11 GMT+02:00 Andres Almiray <[email protected]>: > >> -1 >> >> A few things I've found: >> >> - artifact is named apache-groovy-incubating-2.4.4.zip; unpacking yields >> groovy-2.4.4. Given the usual pattern of other apache projects I expect it >> to be apache-groovy-2.4.4 but I guess this is no biggie ;-) >> > > It is voluntary. -incubating is only required on the source package. We > don't want to confuse our users with version numbers, in particular with > Maven artifacts, that contain -incubating while the previous versions (for > the past 10 years) did not :) > > >> - gradlew is missing (I know, I know) so README.adoc mentions how to >> build the source assuming you already have the wrapper (which you don't!). >> You must install gradle (good!) or copy the wrapper files from another >> project (not so good). I'd suggest updating this file with the following >> instructions >> > > Read again, the README.adoc file explains why gradlew is missing > (unfortunately...) and what you should do. > > >> - minimum Gradle version needed (it looks like 2.3) >> > - how to install gradle if you don't have it: >> - the manual and error prone way >> - use gvm | sdkmanager FTW! >> - generate wrapper files by invoking `gradle wrapper` >> - *OPTIONAL* mentioning https://github.com/dougborg/gdub for good >> measure >> >> > Same answer. This is not required, the README explains what you should do, > and Gradle (any version) will be used to bootstrap the wrapper. > > >> After setting up the wrapper, invoking build on the sources yields an >> error with RAT: >> >> Unapproved Licenses: >> ~/groovy-2.4.4/gradle.properties >> >> it looks like this file has no header !! Either add a header of mark it >> as an exclusion in quality.gradle. >> >> I really would like to see groovy-2.4.4 out int he wild (it's been too >> long since the last release) but I'm afraid I must vote -1 because it can't >> be built from source :-( >> >> It can. > >> Cheers, >> Andres >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast >> http://jroller.com/aalmiray >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray >> -- >> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator. >> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, >> and those who don't. >> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion. >> >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Guillaume Laforge <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> The source package looks alright at first sight, but I didn't try >>> building from source, or do some further checking (like comparisons with >>> what's in Git or whatever). >>> I've also verified the signature, which is okay. >>> >>> Looks good! >>> >>> Guillaume >>> >>> >>> 2015-07-09 22:29 GMT+02:00 Cédric Champeau <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> Dear community, >>>> >>>> This is our second attempt to release Apache Groovy 2.4.4 after a first >>>> missed released a few weeks ago. Since our last try, we fixed the problems >>>> that were highlighted by our mentors. In particular, we removed the last >>>> jars from the source distribution, we fixed the missing headers and >>>> relicensed the documentation to ALv2. >>>> >>>> The changelog for this release can be found here: >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12318123&version=12331941 >>>> >>>> Tag for the release: >>>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-groovy.git;a=commit;h=716b0b1bd56eeab04e4441eecc91c2cd8bfda8b6 >>>> <https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-groovy.git;a=tag;h=19f70958f39f0cc5c6b4d3e9471fd297400647d2> >>>> >>>> The artifacts to be voted on are located here: >>>> http://people.apache.org/~cchampeau/groovy/ >>>> >>>> Release artifacts are signed with the following keys: >>>> http://people.apache.org/~cchampeau/groovy/KEYS >>>> >>>> It is expected that mentors or PPMC members check at least checksums >>>> and signatures, and of course much better if you can also verify the source >>>> package. >>>> >>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating. >>>> >>>> The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of at >>>> least three +1 PPMC votes are cast. >>>> >>>> [ ] +1 Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating >>>> [ ] 0 I don't have a strong opinion about this, but I assume it's ok >>>> [ ] -1 Do not release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating because... >>>> >>>> Here is my vote: >>>> >>>> +1 (binding) >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Guillaume Laforge >>> Groovy Project Manager >>> Product Ninja & Advocate at Restlet <http://restlet.com> >>> >>> Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/ >>> Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+ >>> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts> >>> >> >> >
