+1
Rob
---
Checking needed:
+ does everything work on Linux?
Not tested
+ does everything work on MS Windows?
Not tested
+ does everything work on OS X?
Yes
+ is the GPG signature fine?
Yes
+ are the checksums correct?
Yes
+ is there a source archive?
Yes
+ can the source archive really be built?
Yes
+ is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact
(both source and binary artifacts)?
Yes
+ does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions?
Yes
+ have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades?
if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately?
Yes
+ does the tag in the SCM contain reproducible sources?
Yes
On 05/10/2014 12:09, "Andy Seaborne" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>
>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>
>+1
>
>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Don't release, because ...
>
>
>Give the problems with building are identified as an issue with the
>testing, not the main code, I am happy to release this build.
>
>>
>> Checking needed:
>>
>> + does everything work on Linux?
>
>Only problems were the security tests.
>
>> + does everything work on MS Windows?
>> + does everything work on OS X?
>
>> + is the GPG signature fine?
>Yes
>> + are the checksums correct?
>Yes
>> + is there a source archive?
>Yes
>> + can the source archive really be built?
>Yes, it can be built.
>
>> + is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact
>> (both source and binary artifacts)?
>Yes
>> + does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions?
>Yes
>> + have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades?
>> if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately?
>Yes
>> + does the tag in the SCM contain reproducible sources?
>Yes
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
