Sorry, I should have included a link before: https://lists.apache.org/list.html?d...@commons.apache.org:lte=1M:%5Bcollections%5D%20breaking%20changes
On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 11:02 AM, Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote: > Please see the discussions on the JIRA about source code compatibility. > > JENA-1389 > https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/362 > > JENA-1495 > https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/368 > > Where is that other discussion? A link would be helpful. > > Andy > > > On 02/04/18 10:03, Claude Warren wrote: > >> Should this not be released as a 4.0 version as I think we operate under >> semantic versioning and the API is not backwards compatible? >> >> There was a similar discussion over in Commons recently where several of >> the functions there were changed to return "this" rather than "void". Like >> our changes here. The decision there was to revert those changes for the >> current release and place the "this" returning versions in the upcoming >> version number changing release. >> >> as noted in the Commons discussion: >> >> The return type is part of the method signature that Java uses to find >> >>> resolve references. >>> >>> Even changing from void to non-void will cause binary incompatibility. >>> (Source-wise, that's fine) >>> >>> >> I am not certain that I should vote -1 on this issue but I would like the >> discussion held and consensus reached before the release goes ahead. >> >> Claude >> >> On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 11:03 PM, ajs6f <aj...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Please vote to approve this release: >>>> >>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release >>>> >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> [ ] 0 Don't care >>>> [ ] -1 Don't release, because ... >>>> >>> >>> + does everything work on OS X? >>>> >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> + are the GPG signatures fine? >>>> >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> + is there a source archive? >>>> >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> + can the source archive really be built? >>>> >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> ajs6f >>> >>> On Mar 29, 2018, at 2:28 PM, Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Here is a vote on a release of Jena 3.7.0. >>>> >>>> This is the first proposed candidate for a 3.7.0 release. >>>> >>>> There are process changes. >>>> >>>> Deadline: >>>> >>>> 2018-04-01 22:00 UTC >>>> >>>> April 1st! >>>> >>>> ==== Process Changes >>>> >>>> 1/ >>>> MD5 files are being discouraged because MD5 is not secure. Projects are >>>> >>> now asked to not publish md5. >>> >>>> >>>> There are no md5 files in the proposed dist/jena area - files on Apache >>>> >>> hardware. >>> >>>> >>>> There are sha1 and sha512 checksums. >>>> * The sha512 is in Linux sha512sum checkable format. >>>> * The sha1 is whatever maven generated and is the same as will go to >>>> >>> maven central. >>> >>>> >>>> Having the sha1 ties the dist/jena artifacts to maven central (as does >>>> >>> the .asc). >>> >>>> >>>> There are md5 and sha1 in the proposes maven repo staging area for >>>> >>> sending to maven central. That part of maven is hardwired to md5/sha1 >>> still. >>> >>>> >>>> There's a script to setup the sha512. >>>> >>>> 2/ >>>> To establish the proof chain for signed artifacts in /dist/project/, I >>>> >>> have been asked to try out the new META files. >>> >>>> >>>> https://checker.apache.org/doc/README.html#ch-meta >>>> >>>> There are two files >>>> >>>> /dist/jena/META >>>> /dist/jena/META.asc >>>> >>>> META says who signs what, and is itself signed by the PMC chair. >>>> >>>> ==== Release changes >>>> >>>> 55 JIRA: >>>> https://s.apache.org/jena-3.7.0-jira >>>> >>>> == Significant Changes >>>> >>>> ** Java9: Building and running on a Java9 platform is supported >>>> >>>> JENA-1461 - Allow ARQ custom functions to be written in JavaScript >>>> >>>> JENA-1389 - Return `this` rather than `void` from Dataset (API change) >>>> JENA-1495 - Return Model from PrefixMapping methods (API change) >>>> >>>> JENA-1458, JENA-1483 - Transaction Promotion >>>> >>>> JENA-1453 - Lucene indexes using a graph field are smaller >>>> >>>> JENA-1490 - Working with Blank Nodes with Fuseki >>>> >>>> == Upgrades to libraries (runtime dependencies): >>>> >>>> No dependency changes. >>>> >>>> ==== Release Vote >>>> >>>> Everyone, not just committers, is invited to test and vote. >>>> Please download and test the proposed release. >>>> >>>> Proposed dist/ area: >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jena/ >>>> >>>> Keys: >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS >>>> >>>> Staging repository: >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache >>>> jena-1022/ >>>> >>>> Git commit (browser URL): >>>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=jena.git;a=commi >>>> t;h=d4e7063e >>>> >>>> Git Commit Hash: >>>> d4e7063e7a6db8ce77699bd0388e1a1bd6816626 >>>> >>>> Git Commit Tag: >>>> jena-3.7.0-rc1 >>>> >>>> Please vote to approve this release: >>>> >>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release >>>> [ ] 0 Don't care >>>> [ ] -1 Don't release, because ... >>>> >>>> This vote will be open until at least >>>> >>>> 2018-04-01 22:00 UTC >>>> >>>> If you expect to check the release but the time limit does not work >>>> for you, please email within the schedule above with an expected time >>>> and we can extend the vote period. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Andy >>>> >>>> Checking needed: >>>> >>>> + does everything work on Linux? >>>> + does everything work on MS Windows? >>>> + does everything work on OS X? >>>> + are the GPG signatures fine? >>>> + are the checksums correct? >>>> + is there a source archive? >>>> >>>> + can the source archive really be built? >>>> (NB This requires a "mvn install" first time) >>>> + is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact >>>> (both source and binary artifacts)? >>>> + does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions? >>>> + have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades? >>>> if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately? >>>> + does the tag/commit in the SCM contain reproducible sources? >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web <http://like-like.xenei.com> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren
