On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 07:55AM, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 15.03.2015 07:15, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > > +1 > > > > I still recommend you not to include RC# into top-level directory name when > > you create the zip file. RC is a logical state of the archive - not its > > physical property. Also, earlier I commented on how the checksums will be > > screwed if you try to re-pack the archive. > > Actually, if I see "Ignite ver. 1.0.0-rc3" printed on my screen when I > run a program, then I do expect the -rc3 tag to be part of the source > directory name. It is valid and reasonable practice to make a public > release candidate. We do that at least once for every 1.x.0 release at > Subversion: > > http://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/releasing.html#release-numbering > > The process we use there is: > > * Release 1.x.0-rc1 as a formal ASF release > * Wait for a "soak period" (typically 4 weeks) > o during this time, users can take the candidate for a spin and > report any problems > o we fix the problems, and if any of them are serious enough > (e.g., requiring a public API change), we roll -rc2 etc. and > restart the soak period > > http://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/svn-soak-management.png > * Once we've decided that the release candidate is stable, we create a > new release based on the same tag, with only one change: the -rc* > tag is dropped from all version numbers (that's basically a one-line > change in svn_version.h). > > We've found that this works extremely well to make .0 releases more stable.
I actually do agree that the described procedure is a great way to stabilize a release. However, i was under the impression that the goal of this exercise is to produce 1.0 release that'd be ready for IPMC vote from release expectation stand-point, not technical merits of the project. If i am mistaken on that - then i want to withdraw my comment. > > On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 06:29AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > >> I am resubmitting 1.0 RC3 for a vote having addressed comments from Brane > >> about some binaries in the project. > >> > >> I have uploaded the new RC3 release candidate to: > >> http://people.apache.org/~dsetrakyan/ignite-1.0.0-RC3 > >> > >> GIT tag: release-1.0.0-RC3 (I deleted the old RC3 tag and created the new > >> one) > >> > >> The following changes were made based on all the feedback I got for the > >> previous RC3: > >> > >> 1. removed > >> ./modules/core/src/main/java/META-INF/native/linux64/libigniteshmem.so > >> 2. removed ./modules/core/src/main/java/META-INF/native/osx/ > >> libigniteshmem.dylib > >> 3. removed ./bin/include/igniteservice.exe > >> 4. added check for JDK version to maven build > >> 5. generated zip file with command: "zip -r9 release-file.zip release-file" > >> > >> Instructions on how to run RAT and how to build the project are available > >> in DEVNOTES.txt file. > >> > >> Please start voting. > >> > >> +1 - to accept the RC3 as Apache Ignite (incubating) 1.0 > >> 0 - don't care either way > >> -1 - DO NOT accept RC3 as Apache Ignite (incubating) 1.0 (explain why) >
