On leave I'm afraid, without enough bandwidth to do tests (not that I've a good track record on voting anyway).

Dave
On 03/10/2019 11:40, Aaron Coburn wrote:
Next week works for me.
Thanks,  Aaron

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019, 04:42 A. Soroka <[email protected]> wrote:

I should be able to test on Linux and vote.

(MacBook Pro battery bug got me, arg!)

Adam

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019, 9:38 AM Rob Vesse <[email protected]> wrote:

I'm on a work trip next week and won't have any free time (was on
vacation
for last weeks vote as well!)

Rob

On 03/10/2019, 09:34, "Andy Seaborne" <[email protected]> wrote:

     Hi there,

     I just want to check whether getting the votes for 3.13.1 is going to
work.

     If it's early next week, are you able to vote?

          Andy

     https://s.apache.org/jena-3.13.1-jira

     which is 3 tickets at the moment, no dependency changes:

     JENA-1764
     Fix missing and duplicate Automatic-Module-Name metadata

     JENA-1766
     Fuseki Web interface endpoint mechanism not working

     JENA-1767
     Enable clear out of all TDB1 location-related state.

     On 30/09/2019 12:26, Andy Seaborne wrote:
     > See the vote thread for 3.13.0 RC2 - the automatic module names for
some
     > modules are wrong. Aaron has fixed this but the release will
interact
     > badly with Java module usage.
     >
     > As well as the automatic module names, there is now JENA-1766
(problems,
     > and solution, with the Fuseki admin UI).  This is in the SNAPSHOT
builds
     > for testing.
     >
     > I think it is better to wait a few days at least to see if anything
else
     > comes up but otherwise I'm hoping for getting this out sooner
rather
     > than later.
     >
     > The master branch is still 3.14.0-SNAPSHOT - to make this a proper
     > x.x.1, could people hold off from merging anything that aren't bug
fixes.
     >
     > If it turns out to be a longer wait, we can branch and release from
the
     > branch but if we can leave the version flip until the last moment
(so a
     > few hours of reverted version), do it on master and release from
master
     > then master has the release history.
     >
     >      Andy








Reply via email to