no worries Matt, it will be easy to include them as I'll respin the release from master. If I can't do it today, I'll do it tomorrow.
Regards, Tommaso Il giorno sab 4 mar 2017 alle ore 16:44 Matt Post <p...@cs.jhu.edu> ha scritto: > Tommaso, > > What's your timeline for fixing this? I just pushed in some changes that > add docker support and provide multithreading for the HTTP server. It would > be nice to include those, BUT if it's a lot of extra work, we can just add > them later (or you could point me to the doc you followed, and I'll do it > on Monday) > > matt > > > > On Mar 1, 2017, at 1:09 PM, John Hewitt <john...@seas.upenn.edu> wrote: > > > > Tommaso, thanks for the RC. > > Kellen, thanks for checking for the -1. > > > > -John > > > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 1:03 PM, kellen sunderland < > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> For a short term fix for the unit test we can delete lines 48 and 50 > from > >> LMGrammarBerkeleyTest.java. > >> > >> A bit of a longer term solution would be that we could have a > @BeforeClass > >> setup method that simply zips the uncompressed files. > >> > >> Thanks again for putting this together Tommaso. > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:43 PM, Tommaso Teofili < > tommaso.teof...@gmail.com > >>> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> thanks Kellen, > >>> > >>> I get the very same issues. > >>> It's probably my fault having copied .md5 and .sha files from the > staging > >>> repo as I didn't have them within my target directory. > >>> I also get the same test failure. > >>> > >>> Hence -1 from me too. > >>> I'll roll it back, fix the issues and create RC4. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Tommaso > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Il giorno mer 1 mar 2017 alle ore 17:54 kellen sunderland < > >>> kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > >>> > >>>> I have to -1 this release for the time being. For me the signatures > >> and > >>>> hashes don't seem to match the binaries downloaded. Could you double > >>> check > >>>> that they match for you Tommaso? I'm also getting a unit test that > >> fails > >>>> when I run 'mvn clean package'. I'm digging a little more into this > >> one, > >>>> but suspect a missing file. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------ > >>>> Here's what I've checked so far: > >>>> > >>>> Release artifacts must include incubating in the final file name - YES > >>>> Release artifacts must include a disclaimer within the release > >>> artifact(s) > >>>> as noted - YES > >>>> Every ASF release MUST contain one or more source packages, which MUST > >> be > >>>> sufficient for a user to build and test the release provided they have > >>>> access to the appropriate platform and tools. - NO > >>>> -Not building due to failing test (BerkleyLM failure). I'm > >> digging a > >>>> bit more into this. > >>>> > >>>> Every artifact distributed to the public through Apache channels MUST > >> be > >>>> accompanied by one file containing an OpenPGP compatible ASCII armored > >>>> detached signature and another file containing an MD5 checksum. > >>>> - .asc - NO > >>>> I get warning: > >>>> "gpg --verify joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.asc > >>>> joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz > >>>> gpg: Signature made Thu Feb 23 09:15:17 2017 CET using RSA key ID > >>>> 891768A5 > >>>> gpg: Good signature from "Tommaso Teofili <tomm...@apache.org>" > >>>> [unknown] > >>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > >>>> gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to > >>> the > >>>> owner." > >>>> - .md5 - NO > >>>> My md5 of joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz is > >>>> 504976876b01294811293aa45b5400f5, the joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar. > >>> gz.md5 > >>>> indicates it should be 22b738eeae45757715080702a5bd2789 > >>>> - .sha - NO > >>>> My sha of joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz is > >>>> 4AB5BA24301590F36AE6452DACC3F21CBD8B3FEC, the > >>>> joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.md5 indicates it should be > >>>> 2a55b6d341dddc5369b22a4802a86ec40accd0a1 > >>>> - KEYS - YES > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 3:55 AM, Matt Post <p...@cs.jhu.edu> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi folks, > >>>>> > >>>>> First, Tommaso, thank you for pulling this together! > >>>>> > >>>>> I want to remind everyone that there's a checklist to go through > >> before > >>>>> sending your +1. Here's from an email from Tom Barber a while back: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hello folks, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I see plenty of +1's going through the release vote, which is > >> great > >>> to > >>>>> see > >>>>>> people taking an active role in getting the release shipped. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> For those of you who are new to the ASF there are a bunch of > >>>> requirements > >>>>>> to sign off for a release which you can find here: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html# > >> check-list > >>> < > >>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list > >>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> My current concern is that people who are new to the incubator are > >>>> +1'ing > >>>>>> software for release without check all or part of the release > >> cycle. > >>>>> Whilst > >>>>>> not mandatory, when you +1 a release please can you try to indicate > >>>> what > >>>>>> you've checked. The reason for this is, the tag Lewis has built > >> off > >>>>> isn't > >>>>>> the tip of master, so if you're basing your +1 on your day to day > >>>>>> development and knowledge of the code base, that's not always whats > >>>>>> shipped. Also in the branching process, its possible merges or > >>>>> alterations > >>>>>> were accidentally made that Lewis has missed (this is very > >> unlikely I > >>>>> know > >>>>>> but you know, code changes). Also people build software on > >> different > >>>>> OS's, > >>>>>> versions of OS's etc so just because it builds on Lewis's laptop > >>>> doesn't > >>>>>> mean it builds on mine, for example. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Also regarding licenses, disclaimers etc, people notice different > >>>> things > >>>>> or > >>>>>> interpret stuff differently. its always possible that someone might > >>>> miss > >>>>> a > >>>>>> library etc so its important multiple eyes run over the same stuff. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Tom > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm hoping I'll have time to go through this tomorrow. > >>>>> > >>>>> matt > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Feb 25, 2017, at 2:41 AM, Tommaso Teofili < > >>>> tommaso.teof...@gmail.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Folks, > >>>>>> Please VOTE on the Apache Joshua 6.1 Release Candidate #3. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We solved 36 issues: > >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa? > >>>>> projectId=12319720&version=12335049 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Git source tag (3447715b3aa0a48ed79465d80618bd5a2f7a7558): > >>>>>> https://s.apache.org/XIxJ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Staging repo: > >>>>>> > >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ > >> orgapachejoshua-1004 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Source Release Artifacts: > >>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/joshua/6.1/ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> PGP release keys (signed using 891768A5): > >>>>>> *https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator- > >>>>> joshua.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;h=aa18365bf5c8c8fb17b084f783a75c > >>>>> 3a2460a98d;hb=HEAD > >>>>>> <https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator- > >>>>> joshua.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;h=aa18365bf5c8c8fb17b084f783a75c > >>>>> 3a2460a98d;hb=HEAD>* > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Vote will be open for 72 hours. > >>>>>> Thank you to everyone that is able to VOTE as well as everyone that > >>>>>> contributed to Apache Joshua 6.1. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [ ] +1, let's get it released!!! > >>>>>> [ ] +/-0, fine, but consider to fix few issues before... > >>>>>> [ ] -1, nope, because... (and please explain why) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>> Tommaso > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >
