On Mar 29, 2010, at 2:22 PM, David Blevins wrote:

> 
> On Mar 24, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Mar 24, 2010, at 3:45 AM, David Blevins wrote:
>> 
>>> Ok, finally got some binaries up.  Took a few spins but finally got 
>>> something up with good signatures.
>>> 
>>> The branch to become a tag:
>>> 
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openejb/branches/openejb-3.0.2/
>>> 
>>> The binaries:
>>> 
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenejb-014/
>>> 
>>> So assuming these binaries pass the TCK, here is my +1 vote.
>>> 
>>> Vote open for 72 hours or as long as it takes to get some TCK numbers 
>>> against the proposed binaries.
>> 
>> 
>> Source and build look good. Is there a signed source archive? I didn't find 
>> one...
> 
> Looks like for 3.0.1 we just relied on the individual signed source archives 
> created by maven, plus the svn tag.  Seems good enough for this release as 
> well.
> 
> I can whip up a tar of the tag if we feel we need it.

My understanding of current apache policy is that the only actually required 
and important artifact in a release is a source bundle sufficient to build the 
project from.  Everything else is maven candy :-)

If you use the current apache 7 pom as an ancestor you get this for free.

Since AFAICT this source bundle is missing from the vote I have to vote -1 on 
what is out there now.  I'd be pretty uncomfortable with a "whipped up" source 
archive that wasn't produced by the normal maven release procedure.

thanks
david jencks

> 
> -David
> 
> 

Reply via email to