Stefan, Thanks for your help.
Those files did come from the OpenJDK (which I figured was "open" - I guess not). The ByteBuffer from Harmony at first glance looks identical to the JDK except for the license, but the PriorityQueue looks different. There was another PriorityQueue (https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/blob/6b450490d01f78287d9eee18e79f81736bfdeac5/src/Lucene.Net.Core/Support/PriorityQueue.cs) that was mostly working, but it had some issues with the sort order that were making some tests fail and it seemed at the time like a shorter path to just port anew rather than trying to figure out what the issue was. But, now I suppose I could write a bunch of tests against the real PQ, swap back to the prior one and then refactor it to make the tests pass. The main problem was - no tests. > Given the GPLed files I've found there really is no point in starting the > vote process right now. Therefore I wouldn't add the zips and signatures to > repo at all. Understood. > The signatures and md5 hashes work for me, but I'm not sure which sha hash > you are using. Based on its length it could be SHA512 but then the hashes > don't match for me (using sha512sum on Linux). Hmm - I used SHA512. Here are the commands I used. gpg --armor --output Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.src.zip.asc --detach-sig Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.src.zip gpg --armor --output Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.bin.zip.asc --detach-sig Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.bin.zip gpg --print-md MD5 Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.src.zip > Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.src.zip.md5 gpg --print-md MD5 Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.bin.zip > Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.bin.zip.md5 gpg --print-md SHA512 Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.src.zip > Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.src.zip.sha gpg --print-md SHA512 Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.bin.zip > Apache-Lucene.Net-4.8.0-beta00001.bin.zip.sha Thanks, Shad Storhaug (NightOwl888) -----Original Message----- From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 7:10 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Release On 2017-04-26, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Unfortunately I can't seem to commit anything to dist svn right now > myself either. seems to haven been an LDAP hickup that's been resolved by now. I've already added your key to the KEYS file. Given the GPLed files I've found there really is no point in starting the vote process right now. Therefore I wouldn't add the zips and signatures to repo at all. > On 2017-04-25, Shad Storhaug wrote: >> Let me know if there is anything out of place, as this is the first >> time I have tried this. Things look good, except for the missing license in the bin zip and the GPL files that we've allowed to slip into the source base. The signatures and md5 hashes work for me, but I'm not sure which sha hash you are using. Based on its length it could be SHA512 but then the hashes don't match for me (using sha512sum on Linux). Stefan
